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.

ORDER :

Arun Monga, J

1. Above titled three writ petitions are being decided vide instant common order since a common assessment order dated 24.10.2019 passed by the Joint Commissioner, Central Excise and Goods and Service Tax qua three financial years i.e. 2007-2008, 2009-2010 and 2010-2011, whereby the additional demand of sum of Rs. 81,46,056/-, Rs. 1,04,97,017/-, and Rs. 1,03,44,427/- respectively have been raised, is under challenge therein.

2. Succinctly speaking, the relevant facts of the case, shorn of unnecessary detail, are as follows:

FACTS

2.1 The petitioner is a proprietorship concern engaged in the fabrication and erection of structures at the sites of principal employers using materials supplied by them and is registered under the Service Tax laws. Pursuant to work orders dated 31.01.2007 issued by M/s Aditya Cement Limited and 06.01.2009 issued by M/s Prism Cement Limited, the petitioner carried out fabrication and erection works at their respective sites.

2.2 For the period April 2008 to March 2009, a show cause notice dated 01.10.2009 was issued alleging short payment of service tax amounting to Rs. 42,60,123/- on the premise that fabrication formed part of “erection, commissioning or installation” and was a service under Section 65(39a) of the Finance Act, 1994.The petitioner disputed the said demand.

2.3. While the final decision on the earlier show cause notice dated 01.10.2009 was still pending, another show cause notice dated 30.04.2010, for the period April 2007 to March 2008, was issued alleging short payment of service tax amounting to Rs. 81,46,056/- on the same premise that fabrication formed part of “erection, commissioning or installation” and thus a service under Section 65(39a) of the Finance Act, 1994, invoking the extended period under Section 73(1) and proposing penalties.

2.4. Thereafter, another show cause notice dated 14.09.2010, for the period April 2009 to March 2010, was issued alleging short payment of service tax amounting to Rs. 1,04,97,017/- on identical grounds.

2.5. The show case notice dated 01.10.2009 qua FY 2008-09 was adjudicated and confirmed vide Order-in-Original dated 15.01.2011 passed by the Adjudicating Authority/Additional Commissioner of Central Excise.

2.6. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal against the said Order-in-Original dated 15.01.2011 before the Appellate Authority of the revenue. However, the same was dismissed vide Order-in-Appeal dated 20.01.2011 and the Order-in-Original passed by the Addl. Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) was upheld.

2.7. The petitioner then filed an appeal before the learned CESTAT, New Delhi against the adjudication and confirmation of the demand by the revenue.

2.8. While CESTAT appeal filed by the petitioner was pending, yet another further show cause notice dated 20.09.2011 for the period April 2010 to March 2011 was issued demanding service tax of Rs. 1,03,44,427/-.

2.9. Meanwhile, by an order dated 27.12.2011 passed by CESTAT, the petitioner’s appeal against similar demand for the FY April 2008 to March 2009 was allowed. The learned CESTAT categorically held that fabrication does not fall within the taxable entry of “erection, commissioning or installation.”

2.10. Notwithstanding, the Department did not proceed to adjudicate the pending show cause notices for the FY 2007-08, 2009-10 and 20010-11 in light of the CESTAT order dated 27.12.2011.

2.11. Instead, on 07.03.2012, the three pending notices for the periods 2007–08, 2009–10 and 2010–11 were transferred to the Call Book, effectively keeping the proceedings in abeyance for an indefinite period.

2.12. The Depar