Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2017 (6) TMI 860

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rected against the impugned order dated 29.10.2012 wherein Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal of the appellant. Briefly the facts of the case are that the appellant is a proprietorship concern owned by Shri William D Souza, S/o Shri. Jochim D Souza. He was engaged in providing repair, maintenance, erection, commissioning, installation, renovation, restoration, finishing works mainly to New Mangalore Port Trust and also to other customers. From the scrutiny of the documents submitted by the appellant it appeared that the service provided by them are chargeable to service tax under the categories of Commercial or Industrial construction Service, Management, Maintenance or Repair Service and Erection, Commissioning or Installation Serv....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....te of that the Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the demand against the dead person. He further submitted that this appeal has been filed by the LR of the deceased. But they are not interested in pursuing the appeal because the sole proprietor has died and as per the provisions of law, the present appeal abates. 3.1. The learned consultant further submitted that it is a settled law that no recovery proceedings can be initiated against the dead person as it amounts to violation of the principles of natural justice inasmuch as the person who is proceeded against is not alive to defend himself. In support of his submission, he relied upon the following decisions: a) New Sharada Industries Vs. CCE 2016-TIOL-2022-CESTAT-BANG. ....