Service Tax
TRT-2025-
Telangana High Court
Date:-11-11-22
In:-
Issue Favourable to Tax Payer ?:-
Order date – 11 November 2022
Key Pointers –
- The Petitioner, District Roads and Buildings Department, Medchal-Malkajgiri Division, State of Telangana., is a State Government department and is engaged in activities related to State Government roads and buildings and providing services in relation thereto. But it was not registered with the service tax department nor did it make any service tax payment under Section 69 of Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994, though it was a service provider.
- Intelligence gathered revealed that Roads and Buildings department of Medchal-Malkajgiri was receiving payments for road cutting restoration charges from various parties on the right of way for laying optic fibre cables passing through Government land under their jurisdiction during the period from August, 2012 to March, 2016. However, petitioner was not paying the service tax collected.
- Accordingly, a show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner by invoking the extended period of limitation. But no reply was filed. However, at the stage of personal hearing, a written statement was filed. The order was passed against the petitioner and no appeal was filed by Revenue. Because of lapse on the part of certain officials, appeal could not be filed against the impugned order-in-original dated 16.11.2018 and the limitation period had long expired.
- On such appeal it was ordered that petitioner shall inform the Court about the officials, who were responsible for not filing the appeal against the impugned order-in-original dated 16.11.2018 and what steps have been taken against them; Petitioner shall deposit 25% of the tax levied in terms of the impugned order-in- original dated 16.11.2018 within thirty days from today; and on such deposit, respondents No.2 to 4 shall not act upon the notice dated 17.03.2021.”
- Even today also when the matter is called upon, learned Special Government Pleader representing the petitioner could not furnish the names of the State Government officials responsible for not filing the appeal.
- In view of the aforesaid development and also considering the fact that the writ petition has been filed long after expiry of the limitation period for filing appeal, the Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition. It recalls order dated 24.03.2022.
- Writ Petition is dismissed.
Download Case Law
