Ivl/s. [Vlahalaxmi Enterprises v. The Commissioner of Customs and Central Tax

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly rn the nature of [/ANDA[/lUS declaring that the impugned Order-in-Original No 10512023-24-Adjn(ADC)-SI , dated 2910112024. passed by the Second Respondent for the F.Y s 2016-17 and 2017-18 (up to June, 2017) under the Service Tax Act (Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994) is barred by Limitation under S 73, the extended period of limitation under the Sub-Section (1) of S. 73 is not applicable in the present case, passed beyond 'l year from the date of show cause notice which is beyond the period of limitation u/Sub-Section (aB) of S. 73, even on merits not sustainable and further that the impugned Ex-Parte Order-in- Appeal No. HYD-SVTAX-RRC-APP'l-013-2025-26, dated 3010412025, of the First Respondent rejecting the Appeal on the ground of limitation without giving any opportunity of hearing, is arbitrary, violative of the princrples of natural justice, unsustainable and illegal and consequently set aside both the impugned orders or ! o a in the alternative direct the First Respondent to entertain the Appeal and decide the same on merits lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Se,:tion 151 CPC praying that in the circunrstances stated in the affidavrt filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further Proceedings, including recovery of tax. interest and penalty, pursuant to the impugned Order-in-Original No. 10512023-24-Adjn(ADC)- ST, dated 2910112024. f,assed by the Second Respondent for the F.Y s. 2016-17 and 2017 18 (up to June, 2017) under the Service Tax Act (Chapter V of the Finance Act 1994) Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. G NARENDRA CHETTY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1&2: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES (senior standing counsel for Cl3lC) Counsel for the Resl:orrdent No.3: SRI B. MUKHERJEE SC FOR CENTRAL GOVERNMENT The Court made the following: ORDER o a o 0 TI{E HON'BLE THE CHIEFJUSTICE SRIA?ARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON'BLI' S R II ISTICE G.NI.NlOHII IDDIN I Writ Petitio n No.22594 of 2025 C)rder, Fleard N'Ir. Cl.Narendra Chett1,, learnccl counsel lor rhe pt: tidoncr; l'Ir. I)ominic Fernandes, lcanred Seuior Stanciins CoLrnsel [or Ccntral Roarcl of Ind:irect ]'axes and Custon-rs (CBIC) appearinll for respondents No.1 and 2 and i\lr. B.\lLrkhcricc, lcamecl counsel appearing for responclent \1.3- L-rnion oF lnclia

2. The appellate alrthoritl' has dismissed the appcal as b,ured bl Lirr-ritauon unclcr Sccrion 73 o{ the Finance ,\ct, 1994 (for shorr '.\ct of 1994'). Therefore, petitioncr, bcing aggrio.ed, has prcfrrre.l the instant Writ Pctirion.

3. Thc nrdcr-in-oriqitral is dated 29.01,.2024.

4. Sub Section (1) r/rv Sub-Secrion (5) of Section 86 ..lf Act oi 1994 pror.icles for a remedy of appcal bcfore thc learned 2 Custonrs, I}ci:,c and Serwice 'Iax i\ppcllatc 'l'ribur-ral ([or short 'cES1"\'f',)

5. Lcarnc.l colrnsel for thc i)ctiri()rlcr subnrits that thr: appellatc auth,rritr' has not talien into consideration rhe explanation iurnishcd bv thc petitioner lrrr thc dela1, l1t approaching rt. It is aiso submittecl that tl-rc ord cr-in-orirtinal was dispatchl'cl tr> thc pctitioner's old :rdclress. Ht: submits that the pcririoncr nral be allorved tc) raisc all grounds :rvailable to it bcfore thc l. ernecl CF.Sl',\T anrl lcrrrrrcd (.1,-S'1. .\'l' tnar be directccl to conrlonc tlrc dclar'. if arl', in irppr:oachinq it il appeal including thc tirr.re' spcnt in pursuing rhc \\'r'it Pctition bcforc this (irurr.

6. l,carnecl Senior Standing (.ounsci tor CBIC submits tliat the petitioncr- :houlcl havc approached the lcarncd CFISI'AT even rf its appcal rvas disn'rissed on the ground of de lay.

1. Having rer5ar-d to the atbrcsaid facts and cir:curnstanccs, the instant Writ lrctLtion is disposed r,f u'irh libcrn' to rhc pctitionct t.r pr cfcr an appeal rvith statutorv prc dcposit, if anv, before thc lcarnctl CESTAT, rvithin a 1;eriod of nvo rvceks. tJ. ltr case thc appcal is prctcrred within the aforesaid pcr:iod of tt-o rvcel<s, lcarnccl (.ES-I',\T s'o'.rld consider the cltrcstion oi clclrv in apprclachinu it, takirrg into account thc timc spcrlt b\, thc pctitioncr in Pur,string the \\'rir l)ctition belorc this Court ar.rd takc a clcci-sion, in accordancc u,ith lan'

9. l-ct ir bc rnadc clcar that rve have not made an\. obscn'atiorrs on thc urcrits oI the czrse. ,\s a sccluel, miscellane r-rr-rs pctitions,. pendine rf an,v, stancl clo s ecl. SD/- SRINIVASA REDDY TANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPYI S TION OFFICER To,

1. The Commissioner of Customs and Central Tax, Appeals-|, Commissionerate Hyderabad. Tth Floor. GST Bhavan, L.B. Stadium Road. Basheerbagh, Hyderabad, Telangana.

2. The Joint Commissioner of Central Tax, O/o The Commissioner of Central Tax, Range Reddy GST Commissionerate. GST Bhavan, FL No, 1-98/7/43, VIP Hills. Jai Hind Enclave, lriladhapur, Hyderabad-500081, Telangana. 3. The Secretary (Finance), firlinistry of Finance. North Block, New Delhi - 1 1 0001

4. One CC to SRl. G NARENDRA CHETTY Advocate [OPUC] 5 One CC to SRl. DOMINIC FERNANDES (senior standing counsel for CBIC) [oPUC] 4i,

6. One CC to SRI B MUKHERJEE SC FOR CENTRAL GOVERNIVIENT loPUcl

7. Two CD Copies o a HIGH COURT DATED:15109t2025 ORDER WP.No.22594 of 2025 .) I 3 1 r[I 2P5 o -t t n * 3na 7q ,. r9 DISPOSING OF: THE WP WITHOUT COSTS 1 1;\ { I I I I (