TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 330
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r in their IT return (26AS) showed TDS deductions. On verification and comparison of documents, it was noted that the appellant has not paid service tax for the period 1.10.2016 to 30.6.2017 as per the details given below : Year Income as per 26AS ST-3 value Difference 26AS and ST-3 value Total ST to be paid Oct 2016-March 2017 5,38,30,707 Not Filed 5,38,30,707 80,74,606 April 17 - June 2017 2,46,02,855 Not Filed 2,46,02,855 36,90,428 Total 7,84,33,562 Not Filed 7,84,33,562 1,17,65,034 2. It appeared to the Department that appellant though rendered the services as per Section 65B (44) of the Finance Act, 1944 had not discharged service tax for the activities carried out in the nature of 'Business Auxiliary Service'. Sho....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oceeded to pass the de novo adjudication order dt. 17.10.2023 again confirming the demand proposed in the SCN. Aggrieved by such exparte de novo order, the appellant had moved the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court by filing a Writ Petition No.35856/2023. The Hon'ble High Court vide judgment dt. 21.12.2023 directed the Tribunal to dispose of this appeal within a time period of 3 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 4. It is submitted that though the appellant had informed the adjudicating authority to keep the matter in abeyance, the adjudicating authority has passed the de novo order in a hurried manner and thereby denied the appeal remedy of the appellant. 5. On merits, the Ld. Counsel submitted that the appellant engag....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot issue any consignment notes to this effect. Later, a letter was sent by them stating that they are issuing consignment notes. The appellant has taken contrary stand and therefore the argument of the appellant cannot be accepted. The appellant having not registered with the Department and not paid any service tax, the demand confirmed is legal and proper. The appellant has not produced documents pertaining to the disputed period and therefore the adjudicating authority could not take note of contention of transportation of agricultural produce. Ld. A.R prayed that the appeal may be dismissed. 8. Heard both sides. 9. The foremost issue for consideration is the manner in which the original authority has passed the de novo order. The Commi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the de novo order, the adjudicating authority has observed that the said officer has received the e-mail sent by the appellant stating that appellant has filed appeal before CESTAT Chennai on 22.8.2023 and Appeal ST/40504/2023 is pending before the Tribunal. In spite of this, de novo order has been passed. We find that de novo order so passed by the adjudicating authority during the pendency of the appeal before this Tribunal is in violation of principles of natural justice, against the provisions of law and requires to be set aside. Ordered accordingly. 10. Coming to the merits of the case, the Commissioner (Appeals) has analysed the issue and after considering the submissions made by the appellant that they are eligible for exemption und....