2023 (10) TMI 1092 - HC - Service Tax

Court Overturns Tax Demand; Case Sent Back to Assessing Officer for Review Under Exemption Notification Entry No. 21

The court allowed the writ petition, set aside the order dated 30-12-2022, and remanded the case to the Assessing Officer. The court found the demand ... Violation of principles of natural justice - opportunity of hearing not provided to petitioner - Exemption from Service Tax - Goods Transport Agency service - petitioner doing the work for FCI, a Food Procurement Agency in agricultural produce - non-production of consignment note(s) - Entry No. 21 of the Notification No. 25/2012-S.T., dated 20-6-2012 - HELD THAT:- Since the impugned order has been passed without any giving opportunity to the petitioner to produce the relevant documents which were in his custody, the present writ petition is allowed and the order dated 30-12-2022 (Annexure P-12) is being set aside and the matter is being remanded back to the Assessing Officer to pass a fresh order after giving one opportunity to the petitioner to produce the consignment note(s) and then pass a speaking order keeping in view the Entry No. 21 of the Exemption Notification, in accordance with law. Petition allowed by way of remand. Issues involved: The issue involves a demand made by the Assessing Authority under Section 70 of the Finance Act, 1994 for a specific amount from the petitioner, who claims exemption from Service Tax as a Goods Transport Agency working for a Food Procurement Agency, based on certain rules and notifications.Summary:Issue 1: Interpretation of Exemption RulesThe Assessing Authority made a demand from the petitioner under Section 70 of the Finance Act, 1994, for a significant amount for the years 2016-17 and 2017-18. The petitioner, claiming to be a Goods Transport Agency working for a Food Procurement Agency, argued for exemption from Service Tax under Rule 4(b) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, and Entry No. 21 of the Notification No. 25/2012-S.T. The key contention was the non-production of consignment notes by the petitioner, which the Assessing Authority used as a basis for the demand. The court found that the order was not sustainable solely on the grounds of non-production of consignment notes.Issue 2: Opportunity to Produce EvidenceThe petitioner's counsel argued that if given the opportunity, they would have produced the consignment notes before the Assessing Authority to complete the evidence. The respondent did not contest the exemption under Entry No. 21 of the Exemption Notification for Transport Agencies involved in food grain transportation. However, they emphasized the importance of producing consignment notes. The court noted that the demand made in the order was not likely to be sustained solely based on the non-production of consignment notes.Issue 3: Procedural FairnessThe court observed that the impugned order was passed without granting the petitioner an opportunity to produce relevant documents in their custody, particularly the consignment notes. Therefore, the court allowed the writ petition, set aside the order dated 30-12-2022, and remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer was directed to pass a fresh order after providing the petitioner with an opportunity to produce the consignment notes. The new order should consider the provisions of Entry No. 21 of the Exemption Notification and be in accordance with the law.