High Court allows petitioner in government works-contract to appeal Service Tax issue, missed due to COVID-19 lockdown.

The High Court directed the petitioner, engaged in works-contract with Government Departments, to approach the appellate authority for redressal regarding the imposition of Service Tax despite VAT deductions. The Court allowed the petitioner to file an appeal due to failure to appear before the Assessing Authority during the COVID-19 lockdown. It acknowledged the challenges faced and permitted the appeal, emphasizing the importance of availing statutory remedies under the Finance Act, 1994. The Court recognized the extended limitation period for judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings and directed the petitioner to file an appeal within the extended timeframe.

---

---

Issues:
1. Liability to pay Service Tax
2. Failure to appear before Assessing Authority
3. Maintainability of the writ petition
4. Statutory remedy against orders passed against the assessee
5. Extension of the limitation period for judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings

Issue 1: Liability to pay Service Tax
The petitioner, engaged in works-contract with various Government Departments, contested the imposition of Service Tax by the Assistant Commissioner, CGST. The petitioner argued that VAT deductions were already made by the authorities for the works executed, hence claiming exemption from Service Tax. Despite responding to the Show Cause Notice and submitting relevant documents, the petitioner failed to appear before the Assessing Authority due to miscommunication and subsequent lockdown caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The High Court acknowledged the petitioner's contention and directed the petitioner to approach the appellate authority for redressal.

Issue 2: Failure to appear before Assessing Authority
The petitioner, due to miscommunication and subsequent lockdown, failed to appear before the Assessing Authority as scheduled. The High Court considered these circumstances and permitted the petitioner to file an appeal, acknowledging the challenges faced by the petitioner in availing the statutory remedy during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Issue 3: Maintainability of the writ petition
The Standing Counsel objected to the maintainability of the writ petition, citing the availability of an alternative remedy through an appeal under Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994. The petitioner's counsel argued that the petitioner was unable to avail the statutory remedy due to the COVID-19 situation. The High Court allowed the petitioner to file an appeal, considering the exceptional circumstances.

Issue 4: Statutory remedy against orders passed against the assessee
Sections 84 and 85 of the Finance Act, 1994 provide statutory remedies against orders passed against the assessee. The High Court emphasized the importance of availing the statutory appeal mechanism and directed the petitioner to approach the appellate authority to address the grievances raised in the writ petition.

Issue 5: Extension of the limitation period for judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings
Referring to the order of the Apex Court extending the limitation period for judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings, the High Court recognized the benefit of the extended period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022. The Court directed the petitioner to file an appeal within four weeks from the date of the judgment, allowing for the benefit of the extended limitation period.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues addressed by the High Court in the case, providing a comprehensive overview of the legal considerations and directions given to the parties involved.

---