IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 13.02.2026 M/S FRIENDS TRAVELS …. PETITIONER V/S STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS …. RESPONDENTS CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHANDER DIMRI Present : Capt. Arun Sharma, Advocate and Mr. Gurjeet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Ajay Kalra, Advocate for the respondent (through VC).

****

LISA GILL, J. (Oral)

1. Prayer in this writ petition is for setting aside order dated 22.12.2023 whereby appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by Commissioner (Appeals) CGST, Commissionerate as pre-deposit in terms of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, for short (the Act) was not made by the petitioner.

2. Brief facts as pleaded in the writ petition are that petitioner-firm is engaged in the business of providing travel services including cab rentals etc. It is claimed that Order-in-Original dated 13.09.2022 was illegally and incorrectly passed exparte by Astt. Comm. CGST, raising demand of service tax of Rs.12,62,053/- with penalty. It is incorrectly recorded therein that noticee failed to respond to any of the communications show cause notice etc. for the reason that notices, if any, were served upon an outgoing partner who had failed to communicate said notices to the firm. Thus, managing partners were unaware of the notice(s) in question. Moreover, the levy in question is absolutely illegal and not warranted in any manner. It is submitted that when petitioner came to know of passing of Order-in-Original i.e. 16.12.2022, appeal dated 10.03.2023 was filed.

3. Intimation dated 14.06.2023 was received by petitioner regarding deficiency in the appeal to the extent that there is no proof of pre- deposit and appeal is time barred, with no application for condonation of delay having been filed. Copy of power of attorney was also not found with the appeal submitted. Petitioner thereafter sought clarifications from respondent No.3 vide communication dated 19.06.2023, seeking intervention and advice on the pre deposit and duty payable on the amount to be calculated. Petitioner further stated there was in fact no delay in filing appeal but if it was found by appellate authority that appeal was filed beyond the period of limitation, petitioner would file an application. Power of attorney was submitted. However, clarification as sought was never received and order in appeal dated 22.12.2023 was incorrectly passed by the first appellate authority. Present writ petition has been filed in September 2025, challenging order dated 22.12.2023.

4. Learned counsel for petitioner argues that necessary clarification in respect to the amount of pre deposit should have been first communicated to petitioner before passing impugned order dated 22.12.2023. In case, such a clarification had been given, petitioner would have immediately deposited the amount and matter should have been heard on merits. It is, thus prayed that impugned order dated 22.12.2023 may be set aside and writ petition be allowed as prayed for.

5. Learned counsel for respondent (on advance notice) has opposed the writ petition, dismissal thereof is sought.

6. We have heard learned counsel for parties and have perused the file carefully with their able assistance.

7. Perusal of Order-in-Original dated 13.09.2022 reveals that show cause notice dated 29.12.2020 was duly issued to the petitioner demanding an amount of Rs. 12,62,053/- in terms of Section 73 of the Act. No reply was admittedly filed by the petitioner. It is further recorded in order dated 13.09.2022 that the matter was listed for personal hearing on 28.09.2021, 18.11.2021, 31.05.2022 and 08.09.2022 but the noticee did not appear on any of the dates fixed for personal hearing. Exparte order was, thus, passed as under :

“(i) I confirm the demand of Service Tax amounting to Rs. 12,62,053/ (Including Cesses) (Rupees Twelve Lakh Sixty Two Thousand Fifty Three only) as discussed in para above under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 199