TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 383X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctive bank where the petitioner is maintaining their account. Pursuant to such order to freeze the bank account, the service tax amount due and payable by the petitioners have been realized. Therefore, no relief could be granted to the petitioners in these writ petitions. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioners have assailed the final order passed by the respective respondent for recovery of service tax amount with penalties before the appellate authority and the appeals filed by them are pending. - Decided against assessee. - W.P.Nos. 5452, 5453, 5667 to 5669, 5727 and 6396 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 17-3-2015 - S.Vaidyanathan J. For the Appellant : Mr.G.Natarajan For the Respondents : Mr.T.Chandraseka ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roached this Court by filing WP Nos. 8237 of 2013 etc., and they are pending. Due to the pendency of the writ petitions, the petitioners could not collect the service tax from the licencees and/or lessees/contractors. Inspite of such reply having been given by the petitioners, the second respondent confirmed the proposal and demanded service tax together with penalty. Challenging the orders demanding service tax, the petitioners have filed appeals before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) Chennai together with an application for interim stay. 4. In this context, it is necessary to cull out the details of the show cause notice, reply given by the petitioner and the order passed by the respective respondent, the details of whic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2014. Challenging the same, the petitioner has filed a statutory appeal before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) Chennai and the appeal is pending. Pending the appeal, the petitioner's bank account was ordered to be freezed, which resulted in the petitioner filing this writ petition. WP No. 5667 of 2015 was filed by The Commissioner, Arakonam Municipality contending that on 22.10.2012 and 19.04.2013, the second respondent issued a show cause notice proposing to demand service tax, for which a reply was given by the petitioner. Notwithstanding such reply, the second respondent confirmed the levy by an order dated 25.07.2013. Thereafter, the petitioner sent a letter dated 26.02.2015 purportedly under Section 74 of the Fina ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spondent and after getting a reply from the petitioner, orders dated 25.07.2013 and 02.01.2014 were issued against the petitioner confirming the levy. Thereafter, the petitioner sent a letter dated 26.02.2015 purportedly under Section 74 of the Finance Act requesting to rectify certain mistake, which according to them are apparent on the face of record. The said petition for rectification was pending. Pending the petition for rectification, the petitioner's bank account was ordered to be freezed, which resulted in the petitioner filing this writ petition. W.P. No. 5727 of 2015 was filed by The Commissioner, Ambur Municipality. The second respondent issued notice dated 22.10.2012 proposing to levy service tax for which a reply was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o be freezed, which resulted in the petitioner filing this writ petition. 5. Admittedly, to realize the service tax amount due and payable by the petitioners, the respective respondent had issued instructions to the respective bank where the petitioner is maintaining their account. Pursuant to such order to freeze the bank account, the service tax amount due and payable by the petitioners have been realized. Therefore, no relief could be granted to the petitioners in these writ petitions. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioners have assailed the final order passed by the respective respondent for recovery of service tax amount with penalties before the appellate authority and the appeals filed by them are pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|