TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (7) TMI 663
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....factual background would be necessary. 2.1 The petitioner-company, which is engaged in the activity of construction of commercial and industrial buildings and structures, was issued a show cause notice on the ground that Daman Commissionerate conducted audit of the record of the petitioner-company and was of the opinion that there was wrongful availment of benefit of Notification Nos. 15/2004-S.T., dated 10-9-2004 and 1/2006-S.T., dated 1-3-2006 by availing reduction/abatement of 67% in value of taxable service under the Notifications. 4. It is averred in the petition that the Audit Officer was of the opinion that the petitioner-company was paying service tax at the rate of 2% or 4% on the value of contract under the Works C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed seeking following prayers. "(A) That Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or a Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order, quashing and setting aside impugned Stay Order No. S.1574/WZB/AHD/2011, dated 30-11-2011 (Annexure "H" hereto) passed by the CESTAT, Ahmedabad; and be further pleased to direct the CESTAT, Ahmedabad to restore Stay Application No. S.T./S-952/11-DB in Appeal No. S.T./433/2011 for deciding the stay application after hearing the petitioners; (B) Your Lordships, may be pleased to issue a writ of prohibition or a writ in the nature of prohibition, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, completely and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the petitioner had filed a Vakalatnama signed in favour of the advocate and on being assured that the request made for adjournment was "on a very flimsy" ground that the Director of the appellate-company had to rush to his native place in connection with serious illness of his close relative, Tribunal declined the request of adjournment. 9. It is submitted before us by learned counsel Mr. Dave that substantial amount has been deposited by the petitioner towards tax liability along with the sum of interest. However, additional amount of Rs. 1 crore has been further directed to be deposited by the Tribunal without affording any opportunity for hearing when there was a genuine ground presented before it. He also urged complete violatio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... contingencies. Even if the direction is for deposit of 20% of the total amount emphasized by learned counsel for the Revenue, since the petitioner has not been able to put-forth its case of complete waiver and even otherwise also, this order requires interference on the ground of denial of opportunity of hearing as also for violation of principles of natural justice. Furthermore, as can be noted from the order of the Tribunal, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner-company also was not present when such an order was passed. 12. In such circumstances, in our opinion impugned order dated 30-11-2010 is required to be interfered with requiring quashment and therefore the same is quashed with following directions :- (1)&ems....