AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (5) TMI 977
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order-in-original no. 63/Pr.Commr./ST/GHY/2022-23 dated 13.12.2002, passed by the Principal Commissioner, GST and Central Excise Commissionerate, Guwahati (respondent no. 2) and to forebear from giving effect to the said order. As an interim measure, the petitioners have prayed for stay of the operation of the said order dated 13.12.2022. 3. The petitioner no. 1 is a company registered under the service tax laws as a clinical establishment providing healthcare services, health checkup and diagnosis services. The petitioner no. 2 is a share-holder as well as Director of the petitioner no. 1 company. It is projected that vide notification no. 25/2012-S.T. issued by t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....services was exempt from service tax and after introduction of negative list regime, vide notification no. 25/2011-S.T., the levy of service tax was exempt on health care services rendered by clinical establishment and it was claimed that the petitioner no. 1 was not liable to pay service tax for the financial year 2016-17. The audited annual financial statement for financial year 2016-17 was submitted to show that the disputed receipts were on account of diagnostic services. 5. However, the respondent no. 2, by the impugned order-in-original, rejected the contention of the petitioners and (1) confirmed the demand of service tax including cesses amounting to Rs. 3,57,30,422/- under Section 73(2) of the Finance Act, 1994; ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nterim relief in terms of the prayer made in the writ petition. 7. The learned standing counsel for the respondents has submitted that the contentions raised by the petitioners were all addressed in the impugned order. It was submitted that by the impugned order, the respondent no. 2 had decided the case on facts and has extensively referred to the statutory provisions. Thus, it was submitted that the writ petition would not be maintainable and it was submitted that the writ petition be dismissed by relegating the petitioners to avail the alternative and efficacious remedy available to the petitioners under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 before the Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, East Regional Bench, Kol....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cted by Part III of the Constitution; (b) there has been a violation of the principles of natural justice; (c) the order or proceedings are wholly without jurisdiction; or (d) the vires of a legislation is challenged; 27.4.(iv) An alternate remedy by itself does not divest the High Court of its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution in an appropriate case though ordinarily, a writ petition should not be entertained when an efficacious alternate remedy is provided by law; 27.5.(v) When a right is created by a statute, which itself prescribes the remedy or procedure for enforcing the right or liability, resort must be had to that particular statutory remedy before invoking the discretionary remedy under Article 226 of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... respondent no. 2 took note of the copies of audited financial statement for financial year 2016-17 and ST-3 return filed for the period of April, 2016 to September, 2016 and October, 2016 to March, 2017 it was also observed to the effect that the petitioners had not responded to the communications made before issuing the show-cause notice to ascertain their tax liability. Accordingly, it was held that failure to disclose position in conformity with the position in balance sheet amounted to suppression of correct taxable value and accordingly, the tax liability was confirmed as already indicated herein before. 11. Thus, in the opinion of the Court, all the points urged by the learned counsel for the petitioners before us has been dealt w....