Ms Pathak Telecom Company PVT LTD Through Its Director Sitaram Pathak vs. Union Of INDIA Represented Through The Secretary Ministry Of Finance Deptt Of Revenue

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Pathak Telecom Company Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition before the Jharkhand High Court challenging an order dated April 27, 2022, passed by the Additional Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax and Central Excise, Ranchi. This order demanded Service Tax, including cess, amounting to Rs. 1,38,82,029/-, along with 100% interest of Rs. 1,38,82,029/-, and a penalty of Rs. 10,000/-, totaling Rs. 2,77,74,058/-. The petitioner also sought directions to allow payment against a different Service Tax Registration Number and to stay proceedings related to service tax liability arising from services provided to M/s T.C.I.L. pending another writ petition before the Delhi High Court. The petitioner received the impugned order on May 5, 2022.

Held

The Court noted that there is a statutory remedy of appeal available against the impugned order dated April 27, 2022, passed by the Additional Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax and Central Excise, Ranchi, under Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the time period for filing the appeal had not yet expired, as the order was received on May 5, 2022. Consequently, the petitioner sought to withdraw the writ petition to avail the remedy of appeal. The respondents did not object to this request. Therefore, the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to pursue the appellate remedy.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus or certiorari to quash and set aside the order dated April 27, 2022, demanding Service Tax, interest, and penalty amounting to Rs. 2,77,74,058/-. The petitioner argued for quashing the order and sought alternative directions regarding payment and stay of proceedings. 2. Whether the petitioner should be allowed to make payment against a specific Service Tax Registration Number (AABFP8663PST001) for contract business instead of the one for PSC Pole business (AAECP5683MSD001). The petitioner sought this as a direction to the respondents. 3. Whether proceedings related to Service Tax liability for services provided to M/s T.C.I.L. should be stayed pending the disposal of W.P.(C) 3016 of 2019 before the Delhi High Court. The petitioner sought this interim relief. The respondents did not object to the petitioner's request to withdraw the writ petition.