2022 (5) TMI 1398 - AT - Service Tax

Tribunal overturns tax liability order, emphasizes natural justice in fresh adjudication

Indo Unique Flame Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax Nagpur – II

Indo Unique Flame Limited Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax Nagpur – II - TMI Issues:Limited issue of tax liability determination without affording a hearing or awaiting response to show cause notice.Analysis:The appeal in this case concerns the order-in-original issued by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Nagpur – II Commissionerate, determining a tax liability of Rs. 1,13,21,769/- under section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994, along with interest and penalties, without providing the appellant, M/s Indo Unique Flame Limited, an opportunity to be heard or respond to the show cause notice. The appellant's counsel argued that despite the lack of response to the notice, a fair conclusion necessitates considering alternative possibilities, which the impugned order failed to do.The adjudicating authority proceeded to issue the impugned order under section 33A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, after noting the delivery of the notice and the absence of a written reply requesting a personal hearing. The Authorized Representative contended that it is the duty of the noticee to respond as per the law, emphasizing the importance of compliance with section 33A.The Tribunal referred to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jethmal v. Union of India and the decision of the Tribunal in Patel Widecom India Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs(ICD), TKD, New Delhi. The Jethmal case involved the Sea Customs Act, 1878, which lacked a specific provision for issuing a notice, while Patel Widecom India Ltd case dealt with a noticee's refusal to accept the show cause notice, which differs from the present circumstances.The Tribunal criticized the adjudicating authority's haste in proceeding to determine the tax liability without allowing the noticee an opportunity to respond, highlighting the importance of natural justice principles. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the original authority for fresh adjudication, emphasizing the need to notify the appellant-noticee of the intent to complete the adjudication process.In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision underscores the significance of affording the noticee a fair opportunity to respond before determining tax liability, emphasizing the principles of natural justice and the necessity for a judicious and fair adjudication process.