Surya CEF JV Vs Chief Commissioner (Patna High Court)
Patna High Court held that section 33A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 mandates granting at least three opportunities of personal hearing at sufficient interval. Order passed without complying the same is liable to be quashed.
Facts- The petitioner has been engaged under an agreement executed by the Executive Engineer, Public Health Division, Jamui to execute, design, construction, supply, testing and commissioning of 100 pipe water supply schemes with electric driven pump and suitable treatment plants in fluoride affected habitations of Jamui District on turnkey basis. It is contested that the services which are being rendered by the petitioner would be falling in the category of exempted services under Entry Serial No. 12(e) of the notification which is popularly called ‘Mega Exemption Notification’. It is, thus, his submission that for these services, no service tax would have been payable.
The Respondent No. 2 issued a show cause notice on 13.10.2021 alleging that the Company is engaged in providing taxable services as defined u/s. 65B(51) of the Act of 1994 r.w.s. 65B(44) of the said Act to its various clients in lieu of consideration for money but have willfully escaped the assessment of taxable value by resorting to suppression with intention to evade the payment of service tax including Krishi Kalyan Cess and Swachh Bharat Cess total amounting to Rs.3,54,59,160/- for the period April, 2016-June, 2017. The Respondent No. 3 was of the view that the amount would be recoverable from the petitioner company along with interest under the first proviso of Section 73(1) and Section 75 of the Act of 1994. Accordingly, the demand-cum-show cause notice was issued.
