Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2025 (4) TMI 9

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ces of "Information Technology Service", "Business Auxiliary Services" and "Management Consultancy Service". It exported services to its group companies in Ireland and USA. It has been holding Service Tax Registration No. AACCA2982JST001. An audit of the records of the Appellant was conducted. It was observed that the Appellant had availed Cenvat Credit wrongly on various issues. Accordingly, a Show Cause Notice SCN dated 24.10.2011 was issued proposing to disallow Cenvat credit Rs.1,29,31,252/-. The Order- in-Original confirmed the said demand and imposed equal penalty. During Adjudication, the Appellant deposited an amount of Rs.34,306/- and Rs.1,59,252/-, which has been appropriated in the Order-in-Original. On appeal, the Commissioner ( .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e imposition of equal penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 CCR, 2004 to the extent of Cenvat credit disallowed. 4. The learned Chartered Accountant appearing for the Appellant has submitted as under :- (i) Show cause notice dated 24.10.2011 has been served for the first time on 01.07.2020 and therefore the entire demand is beyond 5 years. (ii) Show cause notice dated 24.10.2011 had been adjudicated after about 10 years on 29.01.2021. Therefore, the order is liable to be set aside on the ground of abnormal delay. He relied upon the following decisions in support of his submissions : - Eastern Agencies Aromatics (P) Ltd. Vs. UOI reported in 2023 (4) Centax 227 (Bom); Sunrise .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d been issued on 24.10.2011 by invoking extended period of limitation. They have regularly been filing ST-3 Returns and bonafidely believed that they were eligible for the Cenvat credit. Relying on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of G. D. Goenka Pvt. Ltd., Final Order No.51088/2023 dated 21.08.2023, it has been claimed that extended period of limitation could not have been invoked. 5. The learned Departmental Authorized Representative supports the impugned order and draws my attention to para 4.1 (page 41 of APB) of the order in original wherein the party had contended that SCN was received in 2011 by gate security and not by any authorized person. She therefore contends that the SCN was served to the Appellant in 2011 itself. 6 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... riginal does not deal with this aspect of the matter. The provisions relating to service of decision, order, summon etc., are contained in Section 37C of Central Excise Act, 1944. Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994 refers to various provisions of Central Excise Act which are applicable to service tax also. It includes Section 37C of Central Excise Act, 1944. Section 37C of Central Excise Act, 1944 reads as under : - "Section 37C - service of decisions, orders, summons etc - (1) Any decision or order passed or any summons or notices issued under this Act or the rules made thereunder, shall be served, - (a) by tendering the decision, order, summons or notice, or sending it by registered post with acknowledgment due, to person for whom it .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n ex parte order. Under the facts and circumstances, I hold that the show cause notices have not been validly served as required under the provisions of the Act read with the Rules thereunder. Accordingly, the impugned orders are not tenable and the same are set aside. The Appellant will be entitled of consequential benefits, if any, in accordance with law. The misc. application for early hearing also stands disposed of". 11. I also refer to the Tribunal's order in the case of Collector of Custom Vs. Shani International reported in 1993 (67) E.L.T. 206. In the said case the service of SCN to clearing agent has been held to be not a proper service. Para 5 of the order reads as under :- "We have considered the submissions. In the case of C .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates