9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 1271X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce placed in the case of NIZAM SUGAR FACTORY VERSUS COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, AP [2006 (4) TMI 127 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA], where it was held that When the first SCN was issued all the relevant facts were in the knowledge of the authorities. Later on, while issuing the second and third show cause notices the same/similar facts could not be taken as suppression of facts on the part of the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of U.P. State Public Sector Undertaking by name U.P. Jal Nigam. They were entrusted with water supply and sewage management along with other functions. The appellants were awarded with work of laying of peripheral sewer line along with NOIDA-Greater NOIDA Express Highway as per the agreement entered into between the appellant and NOIDA authority, a body under Govt. of Uttar Pradesh. The appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . On contest the said show cause notice was adjudicated through the impugned order wherein the demand was confirmed and penalty was imposed. Aggrieved by the said order appellant is before this Tribunal. 3. Heard the ld.Counsel for the appellant. The ld.Counsel for appellant has submitted that earlier show cause notice dated 05.02.2009 was issued demanding Service Tax in terms of agreement ente ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and NOIDA authority for laying down water and sewerage line along NOIDA-Greater NOIDA Express Highway was the basis for issue of show cause notice dated 05.02.2009 and show cause notice dated 21.10.2010 and the period involved in two said show cause notices respectively was 2004-05 to 2007-08 and 2005-06 to 2009-10. Therefore it is clear that on the same set of facts the show cause notice dated 21 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
