2023 (11) TMI 1131

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and Mr. Dominic Fernandes, learned counsel for respondents No. 1 and 2. We have also heard Mr. Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India representing respondent No. 3. 2. On 27.06.2023, we had passed the following order which sums up the controversy in question: Challenge made in this writ petition is to the legality and validity of the order-in-original dated 23.03.2023 passed by respondent No. 1. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to para 13.9 of the said order-in-original and submits that respondent No. 1 did not put the petitioner on notice regarding production of original supporting documents as to the claim of the petitioner qua non-taxability of the services rendered ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....vice tax vide the Notification No. 25/2012-Service Tax dated 20.06.2012 issued by the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), Government of India. 5. However, vide the impugned order-in-original dated 23.03.2023 respondent No. 1 rejected the contention of the petitioner and confirmed the demand in terms of the show cause notice. 6. Aggrieved, the present writ petition has been filed. 7. Mr. Dominic Fernandes, learned counsel for respondents No. 1 and 2 submits on instruction that respondent No. 1 was compelled to pass the impugned order-in-original as no documentary evidence was furnished by the petitioner. He has referred to paragraph No. 13.5 of the impugned order-in-original to that effect. However, he fairly submits that court m....