9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 530X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... V. Raghuraman, Adv. for Petitioner Mr. Amit Deshpande, Adv. for Respondents ORDER 1. The petitioner - Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (KPTCL) has filed this writ petition in this Court on 07.12.2016 challenging the impugned Show Cause Notice No.3/2016-17 dated 20.06.2016 vide Annexure-B issued by the Commissioner of Central Excise Service Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit (Audit), New Delhi. 2. The main issue raised in the impugned show cause notice by the Respondent-Service Tax Department against the Government of Karnataka Undertaking KPTCL is that in the contracts awarded by the KPTCL to other various Contractors for erection of poles, installation of transformers, setting up of Sub Stations, maintenance of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble to Service Tax under the head Declared Services and why it should not be so taxed is the main issue, on which the petitioner- KPTCL was called upon to show cause before the concerned authority having territorial jurisdiction over the petitioner namely, Central Excise Service Tax, LTU, Bangalore. 4. The petitioner-KPTCL appears to have filed a reply before the Designated authority Prl.Commissioner of Central Excise Service Tax, LTU, Bangalore, vide Annexure-F dated 12.02.2016, but before the said show cause notice could be adjudicated by the said concerned authority, the petitioner-KPTCL chose to file this writ petition in this Court and a coordinate Bench of this Court granted the interim order staying the operation of the im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the said provisions of S.66(E)(e) of the Finance Act, 1994, is nothing but a wholly frivolous plea raised by the petitioner KPTCL, Government Undertaking, which was expected to be a more responsible litigant compared with others, just to maintain the writ petition against the show cause notice under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. A deeming definition of Declared Services to be taxable service in S.66(E) of the Act is fully within the legislative competence of Union of India and it does not detain this Court on a frivolous contention like this. There is nothing unconstitutional and ultra vires in the said definition. 9. This Court is surprised at the frivolous kind of plea raised by the Government Undertaking Corporation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty or so called substantial question of law is nothing but a futile attempt on the part of the assessee, unnecessarily encroaching upon he precious public time of the Constitutional Courts without allowing the competent adjudicating authorities or appellate authorities to apply their mind to the contentions raised by the assessee and then pass appropriate orders in the matter. Such an exercise of putting the cart before the horse is not at all called for in this case. 11. This Court is therefore of the clear and considered opinion that a Government Undertaking was clearly ill-advised to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court at the premature stage of show cause notice issued by the Service Tax Department and such premature writ petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
