TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 871
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hujanga Rao, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for respondent No.4. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief/s, viz., "....issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Order or Direction declaring the Order in-Original No. 73/2023-24-Adjn(ADC)-ST, dated 24.11.2023 passed by the Respondent for the tax period 2016-17 and 2017-18 (Upto June 2017) levying alleged Service Tax of Rs.1,09,21,028/- under Section 73(2), Penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 of Rs.1,09,21,028/-, Interest at the applicable rates on the amount mentioned under Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994, the Penalty of Rs.10,000/-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of Service Tax. As such, the petitioner was not liable for the levy of service tax for the nature of work that he had executed. 4. A show cause notice was issued by respondent No.2 to the petitioner on 28.04.2022. According to the petitioner, the show cause notice was issued at the address where the petitioner was having its establishment before 2019. However, because of certain losses that the establishment suffered, the entire business was closed down and the petitioner has vacated the said premises and shifted to a different location. 5. Consequently, the show cause notice was served at the earlier location i.e., M/s. Gopal Reddy, Plot No.31, Kisan nagar, Bhageeratha Colony, Mahabubnagar, Telangana. However, some official in the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 8. According to the petitioner, in terms of the aforesaid notification, he is not liable to pay any service tax for the works executed during the relevant period, and therefore, the impugned order is liable to be interdicted on the basis of the above mentioned Notification No.25/2012-ST, dated 20.06.2012. 9. Though, petitioner has given certain explanation in respect of change of his address and the documents which was enclosed in reply to the show cause notice specifically reflecting his present address in which he has been submitting his income tax returns etc., but all said and done there does not seem to be any intimation made by the petitioner informing the respondents in respect of the present change of the address. The petition....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dated 20.06.2012. The impugned order dated 24.11.2023 does not seem to be specially dealing with the said exemption and would require reconsideration. 12. In such circumstances, the petitioner definitely requires to be given an opportunity to prove his case for the reasons that if at all the nature of work executed by him falls under the Notification No.25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012, the petitioner would not be liable to pay any service tax and which needs to the proved by the petitioner before the respondent authorities. 13. Only on this very ground, we intend to permit the petitioner to prefer an appeal before the Appellate Authority by condoning the delay that has occurred in between. That for the lapse on the part of the petitioner....