AVAYA GLOBAL CONNECT LTD. Vs. CCE, AHMEDABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant is registered with the department as a service provider in the category of repairs and maintenance service and commissioning and installation service. On finding that appellant during the year 2005 -2006 had shown certain income from software activation in the balance sheet, proceedings were initiated for collection of service tax on this income treating the service provided as falling under business auxiliary service. After issue of show cause notice and adjudication process, service tax of Rs. 2,08,89,202/ - for the period from 1 -7 -03 to 30 -10 -06 has been demanded and penalties have been imposed under various sections of Finance Act, 1994.

(2.) THE learned advocate on behalf of the appellants submitted that the personal hearing was fixed on 19 -3 -08 and on that day Shri Sasi Nair, Excise in -charge appeared for the hearing and had filed written submissions. However he had also requested that another date may be given in view of the fact that the advocate for the appellants was away. The learned advocate also made detailed submissions as regards levy of service tax on activation charges. We are not going into the details of the submissions and their merits in view of the fact that we find that the matter has to be remanded to the Commissioner in view of the non observance of principles of natural justice. Not only we find from the letter submitted during the personal hearing that appellant had sought adjournment on the ground that the advocate was away but also we find that there is not even a mention of this request in the order and reasons for rejection of the request. It is also not clear from the order as to on how many occasions personal hearing were offered. Under these circumstances, we hold that appellants have not got sufficient opportunity to present their case and therefore the matter is required to be remanded. Accordingly we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority for a fresh decision on the issue after giving reasonable opportunity to present their case to the appellants.