The Peripheral Service vs. The Union Of INDIA

Original PDF →

CWJC/11102/2025HC PatnaGSTCNR BRHC01058806202522 April 2026Bench: MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH,MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, The Peripheral Service through its Proprietor Shri Rajesh Kumar, filed a writ petition before the Patna High Court challenging Adjudication Order No. 63/ST/AC/2024, dated 03.04.2025, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax and Central Excise Patna-I (Respondent No. 2). This order confirmed a demand of Service Tax amounting to Rs. 1,88,452.00 for the tax period April 2016 to June 2017. The adjudication order also imposed interest and penalties under various sections of the Finance Act, 1994, including penalties under Section 78, Section 77(2), and Section 77(1)(c)(ii). The demand was based on a Demand-Cum-Show Cause Notice dated 23.10.2021, issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Patna Central Division (Respondent No. 3).

Held

The Court granted the petitioner liberty to avail the appropriate alternative remedy provided under the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of. The Court did not delve into the merits of the adjudication order or the demands and penalties raised therein. The primary finding is that the petitioner should pursue the statutory appellate mechanism rather than approaching the High Court directly via a writ petition in this instance. No specific issue was decided on merits; the decision was procedural.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to challenge the Adjudication Order No. 63/ST/AC/2024, dated 03.04.2025, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax and Central Excise Patna-I, through a writ petition, considering the availability of alternative remedies under the Finance Act, 1994. Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner sought to quash the adjudication order and impose penalties. The specific arguments regarding the merits of the demand or penalties are not recorded in the provided text, as the petitioner sought liberty to avail alternative remedies at the outset. Revenue's Argument: The revenue's arguments are not recorded in the provided text, as the writ petition was disposed of on the petitioner's request to pursue alternative remedies.

Sections Cited

Section 73, Section 75, Section 77(1)(c)(ii), Section 77(2), Section 78

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11102 of 2025 ====================================================== The Peripheral Service through its Proprietor- Shri Rajesh Kumar, Aged about 56 years, Male, S/o Late Jagdeo Prasad Singh, Address Office No.03, M.F., Om Complex, S.P. Verma Road, Post Office-GPO, Police Station- Kotawali, Patna-800001. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The Union of India through the Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax and Central Excise Patna-I, 3rd Floor, GST Bhawan, Central Revenue Building, Birchand Patel Path, Police Station- Kotwali, Post-Office- GPO, Patna -800001. 2. The Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax and Central Excise Hqrs. Patna-I, 3rd Floor, GST Bhawan, Central Revenue Building, Birchand Patel Path, Police station- Kotwali, Post-Office- GPO, Patna -800001 3. The Assistant Commissioner, Patna Central Division, Central Goods and Service Tax and Central Excise, Chandpura House, Near Dadi ji Mandir, Bank Road, West Gandhi Maidan, Police Station- Gandhi Maidan, Post- office- GPO, Patna -800001. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Radha Raman, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sriram Krishna (Sr. Standing Counsel, CGST) Mr. Prabhat Kumar Singh, Advocate Ms. Ruchi Mandal, Jr. Counsel, CGST ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA

ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH) 2 22-04-2026 The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:- “1. That instant Writ-petition is being 2/3 filed for issuance of an appropriate Writ/ Order/ Orders/Direction for Quashing Adjudication Order No. 63/ST/AC/2024, dated 03.04.2025, under DIN-2025460XV00000DFY3 (Annexure- P:2) passed by the respondent no.2, under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994, wherein demand of Service Tax Rs.1,88,452.00 confirmed under Section 73, along with interest under Section 75 and imposed penalty amounting to Rs. 1,88,452.00 under Section 78, Penalty Rs.30,000.00 under Section 77(2) and penalty Rs.10,000.00 under Section 77(1)(c)(ii) of the Finance Act, 1994, in relating to tax period April, 2016 to June, 2017 which has been passed in context of Demand-Cum-Show Cause Notice issued

under C.No.II(39)784/CGST- PCD/SCN/TPS/2021-22/3004, dated 23.10.2021, DIN 20211260XU0000337EBI (hereinafter referred as DSCN) (Annexure-P:1), issued by respondent no.

And The petitioner may be granted stay of operation of order impugned till disposal of instant petition. And/or The petitioner may be granted any other relief/reliefs for which he may be deemed entitled to by this Hon’ble Court.”

At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty on behalf of the petitioner to avail appropriate alternative remedy as is provided for under the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994. Liberty, so sought, is granted.

3/3

Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

GAURAV S./- (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) (Arun Kumar Jha, J) U

Reproduced from the public record of the Patna High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.