2016 (2) TMI 809

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....th respondent does not appear to have been served or any counsel having received notice. This writ petition prays for a certiorari to quash the impugned demand-cum-show cause notice dated 21/22.04.2010 including the original assessment order which was passed on 30.11.2010 contained in annexure nos. 1 and 2 respectively to the writ petition. Learned Counsel has vehemently urged that in view of latest law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Kerala versus Larsen and Tourbo Ltd. reported in 2015 (39) S.T.R. 913 (S.C.) the entire imposition of such service tax on the petitioner is without jurisdiction and therefore any realization from the petitioner or demand raised is absolutely without auth....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d. vs. Their Workmen. 2. AIR 1962 SC 1810, Khardah Company Ltd. vs. Raymond & Co. (India) Private Ltd. 3. AIR 1963 SC 1685, Union of India vs. A.L. Rallia Ram. 4. AIR 1963 SC 90, Waverly Jute Mills Co. Ltd. vs. Raymond & Co. (India) Private Ltd. 5. 2007 (25) LCD 176, United Bank of India vs. Achintya Kumar Lahiri. 6. (1973) 2 SCC 474, Chandrika Misir and another vs. Bhaiya Lal. 7. AIR 1954 SC 340, Kiran Singh and others vs. Chaman Pawan. We have considered the aforesaid submissions raised by Sri Sinha with regard to maintainability of the writ petition and we are unable to agree with the proposition which has been supported by decisions relied upon him for the simple reason that the same very assessment, quashing of whic....