2021 (10) TMI 124
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ar Gupta, Mr. Premkand Pal, Mr. Chetan Kumar Shukla and Ms. Hemlata Rawat, Advs. Respondent Through : None. O R D E R [Court hearing convened via video-conferencing on account of COVID-19] CM No.29756/2021 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. W.P.(C) 9628/2021 & CM No.29755/2021 [Application filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking stay on the operation of the impugned order] 2. The ins....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stoms (CBEC) circular bearing no. 1053/02/2017-CX, dated 10.03.2017. (iii) No pre-show cause notice consultation was carried out, although, the demand was over Rs. 50,00,000/-, which was a requirement of paragraph 5 of the aforementioned circular dated 10.03.2017 (iv) No hearing was given to the petitioner prior to passing of the impugned order. (v) The impugned order has gone beyond the ord....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....'Business Auxiliary Services', the petitioner had failed to pay service tax amounting to Rs. 2,40,03,002/-. Mr. Aggarwal has pointed out that this amount has been paid. In this behalf, our attention has been drawn to page 178 and 232 of the case file. 4. We may note that, the record, at present, shows that the case set up by the petitioner was that, it had deposited excess amount towards service ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e order dated 30.06.2020, contrary to the scope of the order of remand. 4.4. The petitioner claims that the injury inflicted was further compounded by not according personal hearing to the petitioner. It is in this context that, various flaws [as noted above by us], in the impugned order, have been pointed out by the petitioner. 5. Issue notice to the respondent/revenue, via all permissible mode....




TaxTMI
TaxTMI