2015 (9) TMI 837

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed without the authority satisfying itself about the jurisdictional facts. In other words an Authority, much less a quasijudicial Authority, cannot confer jurisdiction upon itself by deciding jurisdictional facts erroneously or wrongly. The Authority issuing the show cause notice cannot take a stand and simply state that having issued the show cause notice, it would be open for the Petitioner noticee to raise all contentions at the time of adjudication and the Adjudicating Authority will take note of the same and deal with them while passing the order in furtherance of the show cause notice. That according to the learned counsel for the Petitioner, is an erroneous premise on which the Authority has proceeded. Reliance is placed on the judgm....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submits that there is a complete shift in the stand taken and in the show cause notice, copy of which is at page 107A of the paperbook. It is alleged that the Petitioner is providing 'Business Auxillary Services', 'Business Support Services'. The Petitioner is registered with Service Tax Department and that is why it is further alleged that the Petitioner - Assessee was approaching the shipping lines / air lines only after getting inquiry from the client and therefore they were acting on behalf of the clients when they book the space or make available slots in the shipping lines / airlines. Mr Nankani submits that the position is quite to the contrary and irrespective of any bookings re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nonresident firm and there was no liability on the Appellant to deduct tax at source. A Division Bench, in Letters Patent Appeal, held that there was material before the ITO to hold that the Jakarta party were nonresidents. The Division Bench held that the ITO has jurisdiction to decide the question either way and that is why it cannot be concluded that he assumed jurisdiction by a wrong decision on the question of residence. 5. In Raza Textiles Ltd. (supra), learned Single Judge of the High Court came to the conclusion that the ITO had clutched at the jurisdiction by deciding a jurisdictional fact erroneously, then the Assessee was entitled for a writ of certiorari. Such a conclusion of the learned Single Judge could not have been rever....