TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (7) TMI 309
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dated 26.05.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.8882/2021. 2. The writ petition discloses that the appellant was a proprietary concern registered under the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (henceforth referred to as the 'CGST Act 2017') and was providing personnel to man security concerns at various Government and non-Government entities and was therefore exigible to service tax. It is stated that on information received by the office of the respondent, an investigation was initiated against the appellant for alleged failure to remit the appropriate service tax to the Government. Following the investigation, several notices were issued to the appellant calling upon the appellant to pro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../2019. 3. In response to the challenge to the show cause notice, the respondent entered appearance before the learned Single Judge and submitted that the appellant is not entitled to the benefit of the Circular dated 10.03.2017 as the said circular was subject to the rider "where the show cause notice is issued for preventive/offences relating to show cause notices". The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that there were no grounds made out for interference with the show cause notice. However, on instructions, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the appellant would be provided an opportunity of hearing pursuant to the show cause notice and till conclusion of the adjudication they would not resort to any coercive....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....llant that the show cause notice be kept in abeyance and that the appellant would appear before the show cause notice issuing authority. He therefore contended that the present appeal was misconceived. The counsel for the respondent has filed his statement of objections. He contended that after investigation, the respondent had issued various summons dated 03.08.2020, 19.10.2020, 27.11.2020 and 13.01.2021 to tender evidence and to submit documents/records required to pursue the investigation in the instant case, but the appellant went on dodging the issue by citing COVID-19 pandemic and never submitted the details/documents sought for. He further contended that during the course of the enquiry, the respondent came to know that the appellant....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he learned counsel for the parties. 11. The Delhi High Court in the case of Amadeus (supra) has extracted the background to issuance to the master circular dated 10.03.2017 by the CBEC: "9. xxx The first report of the Tax Administration Reform Commission ('TARC') made a recommendation that- "It is desirable to avoid disputes where a collaborative approach can provide a solution. An administrative pre-dispute consultation mechanism may be instituted in both the organizations for resolving tax disputes at the pre-notice stage through an open dialogue with the taxpayer, in which both sides articulate and discuss their respective positions and views on the matter at hand. An amicable resolution would be possible when a common vie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n issued from F No.1080/09/DLA/MISC/15 dated 21st December 2015. Such consultation shall be done by the adjudicating authority with the assessee concerned. This is an important step towards trade facilitation and promoting voluntary compliance and to reduce the necessity of issuing show cause notice." 12. In the present case, it is seen that every attempt made by the respondent to secure information/document from the appeal were stonewalled by the appellant. Though the show cause notice issued by the respondent which was impugned before the learned Single Judge was not preventive in nature but yet an offence report was registered against the appellant. If the appellant desired to seek the benefit of the Master Circular dated 10.03.2....