https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258514 The court quashed the notice dated 11.08.2014 under Section 87 of the Finance Act, 1994, emphasizing the necessity of completing adjudication before recovery actions. The court considered the lack of adjudication and disputed amount, analyzed statements under Section 14 of the Excise Act to determine liability towards service tax, and relied on judicial decisions from High Courts of Gujarat and Uttarakhand. This led to the decision to quash the recovery notice and direct adjudication of the disputed amount outlined in the demand-cum-show cause notice. en-us Thu, 15 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Jan 2016 14:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258514 The court quashed the notice dated 11.08.2014 under Section 87 of the Finance Act, 1994, emphasizing the necessity of completing adjudication before recovery actions. The court considered the lack of adjudication and disputed amount, analyzed statements under Section 14 of the Excise Act to determine liability towards service tax, and relied on judicial decisions from High Courts of Gujarat and Uttarakhand. This led to the decision to quash the recovery notice and direct adjudication of the disputed amount outlined in the demand-cum-show cause notice. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 15 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258514