9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 1340X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the order of the 3rd respondent is without jurisdiction, in as much as the services rendered by it to the main contractor are exempt from payment of service tax in terms of the Notification No. 25/2012-Service Tax, dated 20.06.2012. On the basis of the material before it, the 3rd respondent has passed the order in original. If the petitioner is really aggrieved by the said order remedy is to file an appeal before the appellate authority before which the petitioner can in a better manner, if he has some material to support his contention, establish his case of sub-contract. It could not be argued by learned counsel for the petitioner as to how the order is without jurisdiction. The issue of the work in question was done as contractor or sub- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Year 2016-17 and 2017-18 up to 06/2017 under Section 75 of Finance Act, 1994 Penalty of Rs. 6,46,317/- under Section 78 (1) of the Finance Act, 1994 on the value of the sub-contract receipts executed for Government Departments apart from imposing a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- under Section 77 (1) (a) of the Finance Act, 1994 and penalty of Rs. 10,000/- under Section 77 (2) of the Finance Act, 1994, even though Sub-contractors executing Government Work Contracts is exempted from service tax vide the Notification No. 25/2012-Seivice Tax, dated 20.06.2012 and the consequential attachment order, dated 05.03.2024 issued by the respondent No. 3 freezing petitioner bank account with the respondent No 5 as arbitrary, illegal, as one without jurisdict ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the work. Thus he has executed the subcontract of laying CC road. The contractor while remitting the payment for execution of the sub-contract had deducted TDS at 0.1%. On the basis of the said information as found in the income-tax portal, it is stated that the 4th respondent had issued a notice dated 03.02.2021 requiring the petitioner to furnish the copies of the Returns in Form ST-3 and Income-tax Returns, for the financial year 2016-17 and 2017-18, and the copies of work orders/contracts/agreements, tax invoices etc. The said notice was followed by another notice dated 28.06.2021. Thereafter a show cause notice dated 20.10.2021 was issued to the petitioner stating that the petitioner had rendered taxable services during the relevant p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eals), however, since the order of the 3rd respondent is without jurisdiction and is in violation of the principles of natural justice. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the services rendered by him to the main contractor are exempted from payment of service tax. The adjudicating authority without taking into consideration the objections raised by the petitioner has passed the impugned order-in-original, which is not sustainable and accordingly prayed for set aside of the same. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents contended that as against the order-in-original, an appeal lies to the commissioner of customs and central excise (Appeals). Bypassing the remedy of appeal the petitioner has approached this Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authority the relevant material in support of his contention despite several opportunities being afforded to him. In the light of the same it cannot be said that the assessing authority has exceeded his jurisdiction or acted without jurisdiction, in passing the order impugned in the writ petition or the order suffers from violation of principles of natural justice. 11. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the P-4, in support of his contention that the petitioner is not liable to pay any service tax, as the petitioner was a sub-contractor. However, it is noticed by us, from the material papers filed along with the writ petition, P-4 a copy of the alleged agreement appearing to be issued in favour of the petitioner, awarding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... file an appeal before the appellate authority before which the petitioner can in a better manner, if he has some material to support his contention, establish his case of sub-contract. 14. It could not be argued by learned counsel for the petitioner as to how the order is without jurisdiction. The issue of the work in question was done as contractor or sub-contractor is one of fact on which finding has been recorded by the 1st authority against the petitioner. 15. No justifiable ground has been pointed out by the petitioner seeking indulgence of this court under Article 226 of Constitution of India. 16. Accordingly, we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition. The Writ Petition is dismissed on the ground of availability of alternativ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
