TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 343
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Nagu And Hon'ble Shri Justice Virender Singh For the Petitioner : Shri Rajmani Mishra, Advocate For the Respondents : Shri Gajendra Singh Thakur, Advocate ORDER This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the legality and validity of order dated 08.02.2022 vide Annexure P/1 seeking recovery of service tax to the tune of Rs.3,91,594/- owing to petitioner havin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot make the payment despite having attempted to do so on 23.01.2020 and 29.06.2020. However, it is submitted by petitioner that payment was made on 01.07.2020 vide Annexure P/5. 3.2 The grievance of petitioner is that despite having paid rebated service tax, impugned recovery order dated 08.02.2022 (Annexure P/1) has been passed. 3.3 The petitioner has relied upon decision of Coordinate Bench of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vice tax vide Annexure P/1. Learned counsel for the Revenue placing reliance on the decision of Coordinate Bench of this Court rendered on 16.06.2022 in WP. No.4805/2022 (M/S. Metrics Ptomotions & Events vs. Commissioner CGST & Central Excise & Another) urges that this Court has declined to exceed to similar prayer in this case. It is submitted that in the case of M/s. Metrics Ptomotions (supra), ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....x was not raised or decided. The question before the Court was as to whether the rejection of application Form SVLDRS-1 can be made without affording opportunity of being heard to the assessee despite the scheme providing for such an opportunity. (ii) It is not disputed by the petitioner that all attempts made till 30.06.2020 to deposit the rebated amount of service tax had failed. The contentio....