- (1.) Instant petition is directed against the show cause notice dt.15/10/2014 (Annx.20) served by the Commissioner, Central Excise Commissionerate, Jaipur-I, Jaipur against the services of 'supply of tangible goods' under sub clause (ZZZZj) of clause (105) of section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994 (declared service as per Sec. 66E(f) of the Finance Act, 1994 from July, 2012 onward). The show cause notice pertains to the period from 01/04/2009 to 31/01/2014 as per Annexure-'A', enclosed with the notice.
(2.) The petitioner is a private limited company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in the business of transportation of tangible goods. It is contended by the petitioner that search was conducted on 21/22.02.2014 and after the material was collected summons/notices were issued to the petitioner on 24/02/2014, 06/03/2014, 19/03/2014, 10/04/2014, 09/05/2014, 11/08/2014 & 18/09/2014 but the Director of the petitioner company, as alleged, avoided his presence on one pretext or other and he did appear on 18/09/2014 and tendered his statement u/Sec. 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and thereafter did not furnish any explanation. The material, which came on record and relied upon by the revenue authorities of Central Excise, being a quasi-judicial authority, served a show cause notice dt.15/10/2014 and called upon the petitioner to explain within the period stipulated which can be taken note of from the bare perusal of Para 25 of the show cause notice impugned herein which reads ad-infra:- "Now, therefore, M/s Tanu Shree Logistics Pvt. Ltd., Near Aaraam Hotel, Jaipur-Ajmer National Highway No.8, Gram-Gidani, Dudu, Jaipur are required to show cause and explain to the Commissioner, Central Excise, Jaipur-I, Statue Circle, C Scheme, Jaipur within 30(thirty) days of the receipt of this notice as to why: (a) Service Tax amounting to Rs.55.604 Crores (Rs.Fifty Five Crores Sixty Lacs Forty Thousand) (icluding Education Cess & SHE Cess) should not be demanded and recovered from them under proviso to Sub-Section (i) of Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1944. (b) Interest should not be demanded and recovered from them under the provision of Section 75 of Finance Act, 1994. (c) Penalty under Section 77 of Finance Act, 1994 for non filing of statutory return in relation to the Service Tax. (d) Penalty under Section 78 of Finance Act, 1994 should not be imposed upon them for suppressing value of taxable services rendered by them."
(3.) It is vehemently contended by counsel for the petitioner that documentary evidence, which gives support to the case of the petitioner and which is already on record, was liable to be taken care of but in the show cause notice impugned herein the authority has failed to take notice and has prejudged the issue and has arrived to a conclusion that the petitioner has evaded service tax to the tune of Rs.55.604 crores on the entire consideration of Rs.488.2532 crores and the authority has made up his mind and is bound to create unnecessary and abnormal demand and calling for his reply to the impugned notice remains a empty formality and is not going to serve any purpose. It is further contended that the statements recorded during search and indicated in the show cause notice impugned herein, are under duress and cannot be read against him. He further contended that the 'Panchnama', drawn on 21/02/2014, indicates the factual matrix of the matter and the proceedings initiated against him are in clear violation of the scheme of the service tax and contended that if the show cause notice impugned herein is read in full, it shows that the authority has prejudged the matter and calling upon the petitioner to file written reply is to comply with the basic requirement of natural justice and in support relied upon judgment of Single Bench of High Court of Madras of M/s Bharat Marine Co. Vs. The Commissioner of Customs (Seaport-import): 2014-TIOL-1703-HC-MAD-CUS and of Hon'ble Apex Court: Oryx Fisheries Private Limited Vs. Union of India, 2011 266 ELT 422.;