M/S. Mayurbhanj Central vs Assistant Commissioner Central .... ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 3996 Ori

Orissa High Court

M/S. Mayurbhanj Central vs Assistant Commissioner Central .... ... on 13 February, 2025

Bench: Arindam Sinha, M.S. Sahoo

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                               W.P.(C) No.4025 of 2025

            M/s. Mayurbhanj Central                ....             Petitioner
            Cooperative Bank Limited,
            Baripada Branch

                                                    Represented By Adv. -
                                               Mrs. Kajal Sahoo, Advocate

                                        -versus-

            Assistant Commissioner Central         ....      Opposite Parties
            GST and Central Excise,
            Keonjhar Division and others
                                                     Represented By Adv. -
                                                   Mr. T.K. Satapathy, Sr. SC
                                CORAM:
                  THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA,
                           THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
                                          AND
                     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO
                                         ORDER

13.02.2025 Order No. W.P.(C) no.4025 of 2025 and I.A. no.2209 of 2025

01.

1. Mrs. Sahoo, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner

and submits, assuming though not admitting that there could be

allegation of suppression by her client, the determination of amount of

service tax due was not made anywhere near within one year from date

// 2 //

of the notice. She submits, the facts are glaring for her to demonstrate

that impossibility to determine within the time cannot be case of

revenue. She relies on use of word 'shall' in sub-section (4B) under

section 73 in Finance Act, 1994 to make his point.

2. She relies on judgment dated 4th April, 2024 of a Division

Bench in the High Court of Patna (Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case

no.18398 of 2023) M/s. Kanak Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of

India and others (tiol print). We reproduce below paragraph-10 from

the judgment.

"10. Here, we agree that it is not an absolute mandate that the proceedings should be completed within one year from the notice; but it requires the statutory authority to take all possible steps, so to do and conclude the proceedings within an year. No steps were taken in the entire one year period, which results in the frustration of the goal of expediency as required statutorily. We hence find that the proceedings cannot be continued."

3. Mr. Satapathy, learned advocate, Senior Standing Counsel

appears on behalf of revenue. We require revenue to issue instruction

for being heard on adjourned date. Mr. Satapathy prays for two weeks.

// 3 //

4. List on 20th March, 2025. Impugned order dated 27th June,

2024 will remain stayed till next date of hearing.

(Arindam Sinha) Acting Chief Justice

(M.S. Sahoo) Judge Jyoti

Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA