M/S . Ashok Kumar Patnaik, Cuttack vs. Assistant Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, Bbsr
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 24.03.2025
Mrs. Wallace, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, impugned is order dated 11th May, 2022 made by the adjudicating authority carrying demand of service tax. Her client is exempt from paying it as he is engaged in sale of chips and scrap. The service stands exempted under notification dated 20th June, 2012. Her client not having received the show cause notice nor impugned order, Order No. 01. came to know of it on intimation of recovery proceeding. Hence, she is before Court seeking interference.
Mr. Kedia, learned advocate, Junior Standing Counsel appears on behalf of revenue and submits, since the order was made ex parte, the contention could not be considered. He adds, the order is appealable. We are inclined to and admit the writ petition because a contention not considered amounts to denial of hearing.
Impugned order is set aside and quashed on the matter of adjudication, restored to the authority. Within two weeks from date petitioner must communicate certified copy of this order and her contention to the adjudicating authority. The authority will then consider the contention and pass fresh order. In event petitioner does not file his contention by 11th April, 2025 impugned order will stand automatically restored.
The writ petition is disposed of. Issue Urgent certified copy.
(Arindam Sinha)
Acting Chief Justice
(M.S. Sahoo)
Judge Prasant
Reproduced from the public record of the Orissa High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.