M/S.Bipin Kumar Panda, Sonepur vs. The Chief Commissioner, GST, Central Excise And Customs, Bbsr Zone

Mr. Mohanty, learned advocate submits on behalf of petitioner that, the impugned order dated 10th February, 2023 has been made by the adjudicating authority carrying demand of service tax. But his client is exempted from paying it as it is engaged in providing services to Educational Institution and the service stands exempted under notification dated 20th June, 2012. The petitioner not having received the impugned order, came to know of it on intimation of recovery proceeding. Hence, he is before this Court seeking interference.

Mr. Agarwal, learned Junior Standing Counsel appears on behalf of Revenue Authorities and submits that since the order was made ex parte, the contention could not be considered. He further adds that the order is appealable.

We are inclined to and admit the writ petition because non- consideration of the contention amounts to denial of hearing.

Thus, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored to the authority. Within three weeks from date, the petitioner must communicate certified copy of this order and his contention to the adjudicating authority. The authority will then consider the contention and pass fresh order. In the event petitioner does not file his contention by 12th September, 2025, the impugned order will stand automatically restored.

The writ petition is disposed of.