9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 623X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Petitioner, it was incumbent upon the authorities to address the Show Cause Notice to the Petitioner and also serve it upon him. A notice of the personal hearing also ought to have been given to the Petitioner in his personal capacity. This has undisputedly not been done in the present case. This itself, without anything more, would make Order dated 2nd December, 2022 vulnerable and suspectable to challenge. The Department challenging the Order of the CESTAT before the Hon'ble Supreme Court would make no difference to the outcome of the present Petition. As things stands today, the Show Cause Notice has been held to be time barred by the CESTAT. There is no stay of the said order. This is apart from the fact that as far as the present P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terest and penalty. The Show Cause Notice, in paragraph 14 (vii), also proposed imposition of penalty on the Petitioner in his capacity as a partner, under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Sections 142 and 174 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Despite the Show Cause Notice proposing to impose penalty on the Petitioner (partner of the said Firm), it is an undisputed fact that the Show Cause Notice was neither addressed to him nor was served upon him in accordance with the provisions of Section 37 C of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In fact, from the record, we find that the notice informing a date to appear for a personal hearing was also only addressed to the said Firm and not to the partners of the Firm in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r dated 2nd December, 2022 passed by Respondent No. 3 against the Petitioner is assailed. 7. From the record, we find that indeed the Show Cause Notice has only been addressed to the said Firm and not to the Petitioner. If the Show Cause Notice proposed to impose any penalty on the Petitioner, it was incumbent upon the authorities to address the Show Cause Notice to the Petitioner and also serve it upon him. A notice of the personal hearing also ought to have been given to the Petitioner in his personal capacity. This has undisputedly not been done in the present case. This itself, without anything more, would make Order dated 2nd December, 2022 vulnerable and suspectable to challenge. 8. However, the matter does not stop here. After the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Once this is the case, even assuming for the sake of argument that the Revenue were to succeed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Order passed against the Petitioner herein still cannot be allowed to stand and would have to be set aside. 12. In view of the foregoing discussion, the above Writ Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) which reads thus:- "(a):- that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue Writ of Certiorari or Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, calling for the records of the Petitioners' case and after going into the legality and propriety thereof be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned order in original No. 0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
