2024 (4) TMI 951 - HC - Central Excise

Petitioner Granted Four Weeks to File Appeal; Appellate Authority Urged for Swift Consideration Based on Prior Orders.

Vishnuraj Jeyachandran Versus The Deputy Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Madurai; The Superintendent of CGST & C. Excise, Madurai

The HC disposed of the writ petition, allowing the petitioner to file a statutory appeal with the Appellate Authority within four weeks. The Appellate ... Violation of principles of natural justice - opportunity of personal hearing, not provided to petitioner - exemption for the services provided to the Government - attachment of Bank Accounts of petitioner - HELD THAT:- This issue has already been decided by the Division Bench of the Principal Seat of this Court in W.P.No.24996 of 2019, dated 30.11.2022, wherein, similar contractors are directed to approach the appellate authority and it was held that wherever the Orders-in-Original have been passed, the respective petitioners are given liberty to file statutory appeal before the Appellate Authority subject to the compliance of the other requirements of pre-deposit the amount as is contemplated under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 as made applicable to the Finance Act, 1994, within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. This writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file a statutory appeal before the Appellate Authority concerned within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Issues involved: Claim for exemption of services provided to the Government, absence of show cause notice, demand for service tax along with penalty, lack of opportunity for personal hearing.Summary:The petitioner, a contractor under the PWD Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, claimed exemption for services provided to the Government. The petitioner challenged an order demanding service tax and penalty, contending that it was passed without issuing a show cause notice or providing an opportunity for personal hearing. The impugned order was received after the petitioner's bank accounts were attached. The petitioner sought relief before the High Court.The petitioner's counsel referred to a previous decision by the Division Bench of the Principal Seat of the Court, directing similar contractors to appeal to the relevant authority. The counsel for the respondents acknowledged this decision, stating that it had been upheld by the Supreme Court in a subsequent case.The High Court disposed of the writ petition, granting the petitioner liberty to file a statutory appeal before the Appellate Authority within four weeks. The Appellate Authority was instructed to consider the appeal promptly, taking into account the previous orders of the Court and the Supreme Court. No costs were awarded, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.