Order Date – 12 September 2023

Parties: Rajeev Kumar Vs The Principal Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax and The Additional Commissioner of Central GST & CX, Sub[1]Commissioner

Facts –

• The Petitioner, Rajeev Kumar, is a proprietorship firm and is engaged in business of civil contract work. The petitioner claimed that no service tax is payable in view of the Sl. No.13 of notification No.25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012.
• Several show cause notices were issued to the petitioner on the allegation that non-registration under service tax and non-payment of service tax for the Financial Year 2016-17. Further personal hearing was offered to the petitioner and he could not attend the date of hearing.
• Ultimately the impugned Order in Original (OIO) was passed.

Issue –

• Whether the principle of natural justice has not been complied or not?

Order –

• The Divisional Bench of Hon’ble High Court observed that no reply the “SCN” was ever submitted by the petitioner. Even the date of personal hearing was fixed four times i.e., on 27.10.2022, 25.11.2022, 07.12.2022 and 04.01.2023, however, the petitioner did not respond to the same.
• It was also noticed that the claim of petitioner that he has relied to the notice in Annexure-2, 2/1 and 2/2, however, those were pre SCN queries made by the Range Officer but, admittedly; the petitioner did not reply to the SCN. It is further evident that the Assessee was given ample opportunity to appear before the adjudicating authority but he failed to do so.
• Further, the letters of personal hearing were issued to him on the address, which were returned undelivered and letter were also sent through e-mail ID. Hence the contention of the Assessee that principle of natural justice has not been complied is misplaced and misconceived and without any  basis.
• Accordingly it was held that no error has been committed by the adjudicating authority in passing the impugned Order-in-Original and the instant writ application is not maintainable.