UDAY SHANKAR PRASAD Vs. COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging the act of the respondents in recovering service tax from the petitioner it is contended that without notice to the petitioner, without hearing him and without granting him proper opportunity, the action has been taken and the original order imposing the tax liability dated 31.3.2013 was never served on the petitioner. As a consequence thereof, petitioner was not aware on what ground tax liability has been imposed and his right to file the appeal is taken away as the limitation for filing the appeal is already over if the order was passed on 31.3.2013 and challenging the action of the respondents in attaching the bank account of the petitioner and recovering the amount of tax, this writ petition has been filed.

(2.) On notice being issued, the respondents have filed a detailed counter affidavit and refute the contentions by pointing out that the order of imposition of tax liability was passed on 31.3.2013 after notice to the petitioner, granting him opportunity of hearing and it was the petitioner who did not avail of the opportunity and did not participate in the proceedings held.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that the notice was sent on an address on which it could not be served on the petitioner and, therefore, entire action has been taken behind the back of the petitioner.