High Court accepts assurances, orders compliance. Impugned order set aside for fresh adjudication. Fair conclusion directed.

The High Court accepted the assurances given by the In-charge Chief Commissioner of Service Tax and directed compliance with earlier directions. Due to an inordinate delay in adjudicating a show cause notice, the Court set aside the impugned order and ordered a fresh adjudication within 30 days. The Petitioner was instructed to appear before the authority on a specified date, with the authority directed to ensure a fair conclusion without influence from previous orders. Arguments on the notice's merits were left open, and the Petition was allowed without costs.

---

---

Issues:
1. Compliance with earlier direction
2. Delay in adjudication of show cause notice

Compliance with earlier direction:
The High Court noted that the In-charge Chief Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai, who also held the substantive post of Member, Central Board of Excise and Customs, filed a detailed affidavit in reply, complying with the earlier direction. The Court accepted the assurances given by him on oath as undertakings to the Court. Additionally, the Chief Commissioner was directed to consider any additional material, including pending cases in the Service Tax Commissionerate, Mumbai.

Delay in adjudication of show cause notice:
The Court observed that a show cause notice issued in January 2009 was adjudicated only in May 2014, indicating an inordinate and unexplained delay. Citing the case of Anil Rai v. State of Bihar, the Court emphasized the importance of early disposal of proceedings. Due to the delay alone, the Court found grounds to set aside the impugned order. Consequently, the Court quashed the order and directed for a fresh adjudication of the show cause notice within 30 days from the appearance or conclusion of arguments, taking the later date as the starting point. The Petitioner was instructed to appear before the adjudicating authority on a specified date. The authority was directed to adhere to the Court's directions, ensuring a fair conclusion of the proceedings without being influenced by previous orders. All arguments on the merits of the notice were left open, and the Petition was allowed without costs.

---