2021 (6) TMI 956

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... yet not been raised before the Authority and otherwise could have been after a notice for hearing. Accordingly, it is found appropriate to first relegate the petitioner to the Authority concerned where he can raise the objection in reference to Section 73(4B) of the Act, 1994. On raising such objection within one month, the Authority concerned is directed to first decide the issue in reference to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... a notice for hearing and is being challenged in this writ petition. It is mainly on the ground that as per Section 73(4B) of the Finance Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as Act, 1994 ), the period given for passing the order has expired. The respondents could not have taken the matter for hearing after expiry of the period. Section 73(4B) of the Act, 1994 is quoted hereunder :- 73(4B) T .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rned counsel submits that the notice calling the petitioner for hearing does not satisfy as to why the determination of service tax could not have been made within six months or a year. At this stage, learned counsel for the respondents tried to justify the delay. The issue aforesaid has yet not been raised before the Authority and otherwise could have been after a notice for hearing. According .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X