9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 197X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the appellants now raised before us were not before the adjudicating authority. Further in the impugned order, we find that certain amounts were received as ‘activity and maintenance charges'. As the appellants had not co-operated with the adjudicating authority, therefore, we find that it is a fit case to impose cost on the appellants - As the impugned order is passed ex-parte and the issue as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vided services of Club Association' as per Sec. 65 (25a) and Sec. 65(105)(zzze) of the Finance Act. 3. Three show-cause notices were issued to the appellants raising demand and for imposition of penalties. The appellants had not filed any reply to the show cause notices nor appeared before the adjudicating authority for hearing in spite of notices issued to the appellants. The adjudicati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not sustainable. 5. Revenue relied upon the findings of the lower authority and submitted that the appeal against the decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Sports Club Ltd. is admitted and is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 6. In reply, the contention of the appellants is also that the institution is a charitable institution and whatever income comes as donation, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 8. As the impugned order is passed ex-parte and the issue as per the appellants, is settled by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat, after waiving pre-deposit, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority to decide the issue afresh. The appellants undertake to appear before the adjudicating authority with reply to the show-cause notice and proof of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
