Gauhati High Court
M/S Technomech Services vs The Union Of India And 4 Ors on 28 June, 2024
Author: Soumitra Saikia
Bench: Soumitra Saikia
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010112032024
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2929/2024
M/S TECHNOMECH SERVICES
A PARTNERSHIP FIRM, HAVING ITS PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS AT
BORBIL NO. 1, P.O. DIGBOI, DISTRICT- TINSUKIA- 786171, ASSAM,
REPRESENTED BY ONE OF ITS PARTNERS, MR. DIBYENDU
BHATTACHARJEE, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, SON OF LATE KALIPADA
BHATTACHARJEE, MOBILE NO. 7086532137 EMAIL-
[email protected]
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NEW DELHI- 110001
2:THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER
CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX GST BHAWAN
KEDAR ROAD
MACHKHOWA
GUWAHATI- 781001
3:THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER
CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX
MILAN NAGAR
LANE F
P.O. C.R. BUILDING
DIBRUGARH- 786003
4:THE JOINT COMMISSIONER
CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX MILAN NAGAR
LANE F
P.O. C.R. BUILDING
DIBRUGARH- 786003
Page No.# 2/3
5:THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX
DIBRUGARH AUDIT CIRCLE-II
DR. LILA GOGOI
MILAN NAGAR
DIBRUGARH- 78600
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S K SINGH
Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I.
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA
ORDER
28.06.2024 Heard Mr. V.K. Chopra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel CGST and Ms. J. Das, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1.
The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 27.03.2024 whereby demand of service tax along with interest and penalty has been levied on the writ petitioner.
It is submitted that the entire service tax levied is on a presumption drawn from the TRACES of Form 26AS issued by the Income Tax Department. He has also referred to a Judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench rendered in M/S N.E. Logistics and Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors [W.P(C) No. 1870/2022], whereby the learned Single Judge has held that the imposition of the service tax on the basis of information available from Form 26AS would be imposition of Service Tax on mere presumption and the same is not permissible. Being aggrieved, he has approached this Court.
Page No.# 3/3 Mr. S. C. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel raises the question of maintainability on the ground of alternative remedy and submits that statutory remedy or appeal is available, the same has not been availed of.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, let Notice be issued, Returnable in four weeks.
Notice is also issued on the interim prayer Since the learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of all the respondents, Notices are waived. However, extra copies be furnished within one week from today.
Let the respondents complete their instructions and file necessary affidavit in the matter.
The question of maintainability is left open.
Matter be listed again on 17.07.2024.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant