Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Pankaj Rai – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
Heard Mr. Bijay Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Dr. K.N. Singh, learned ASG assisted by Mr. Anshuman Singh, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the CGST and CX.
2. In the present writ application, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-
“i) The show cause notice bearing No.:- C. No. V(18)379/Pankaj Rai/SCN/PD-W/2021- 22/1585 dated 11.10.2021 (as contained in Annexure-P-2) issued by the Respondent No.- 4 for Service tax amounting to Rs.13,07,700 (Thirteen lakhs Seven Thousand Seven hundred only) for the Period April 2016 to June 2017/- under proviso to sub section (1) of Section 73 Finance Act, 1994 read with S 174 of the CGST Act, 2017, applicable interest under S. 75 Finance Act, 1994 read with S 174 of the CGST Act, 2017, Penalty under Section 78 Finance Act, 1994 read with S 174 of the CGST Act, 2017 for, Penalty under Section 77(1)(c)(ii) Finance Act, 1994 read with S 174 of the CGST Act, 2017, penalty under section 77(1)(a) & Penalty under section 77(1)(c)(ii) Finance Act, 1994 read with S 174 of the CGST Act, 2017 be quashed as the show cause notice is time barred in view of the provis
The court held that a service tax demand order issued after the statutory time limit is invalid, emphasizing the necessity for timely adjudication in tax matters.
The court emphasized timely adjudication of tax matters under Section 73(4B) of the Finance Act, affirming that prolonged departmental delays undermine fairness and legality.
The extended period of limitation under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 can only be invoked with allegations of fraud, collusion, wilful mis-statement, suppression of facts, or contravention o....
Court held that tax demands require adherence to statutory limits, and if payment is made prior to notice issuance, penalties are not justified.
Service of show cause notice and order under Section 37C of the Central Excise Act, 1944 requires proof of delivery to ensure proper service. The provisions of Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, ....
Composite show-cause notices covering multiple financial years under CGST/KGST Act are illegal as assessments must pertain to individual years, respecting statutory limitations and ensuring natural j....
Service tax demands confirmed without valid service of notice violate natural justice principles, leading to appeal's success.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
