Service tax investigation protections limited harassment and coercive recovery, while demand could still proceed according to law.

The Court declined to stay the investigation into alleged service tax non-payment, but held that summons and examination of directors and officers should not be used oppressively. It treated departmental guidance requiring summons to be used only as a last resort as relevant protection against coercive recovery, and directed that the petitioners not be unduly harassed, that examination be confined to regular office hours, and that no coercive step be taken to compel payment during the investigation. The challenge to the levy of service tax on hire-purchase and lease financing was not finally decided and was left for examination on affidavits. Demand could still be raised in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the investigation into alleged service tax non-payment should be stalled or controlled to prevent harassment and coercive recovery, and whether the petitioners were entitled to protection against being compelled to make payment during the investigation.

Analysis: The petition raised a constitutional challenge to the levy of service tax on hire-purchase and lease financing, but that question was not decided finally and was directed to be examined on affidavits. On the investigative side, the Court accepted that summons and examination of directors and officers should not be used oppressively. It referred to the departmental instruction that summons should be a last resort and not a means to force payment of disputed dues. While declining to stall the investigation altogether, the Court directed that the petitioners should not be unduly harassed, that examination should be confined to regular office hours, and that no coercive step should be taken to compel payment of service tax, though demand could be raised in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The petitioners received limited protection against coercive recovery and harassment during investigation, but the investigation itself was not stayed and the demand could still be pursued according to law.

---