Nadiadwala Grandson Copyright-Service Tax Dispute Sent Back After Tribunal Finds Its Reply Was Not Properly Considered

The appeals challenged an order dated 1 October 2025 holding the appellant liable for service tax in respect of alleged copyright services.

The appellant contended that its reply to the show-cause notices (SCNs), filed on 30 September 2025, had not been properly considered.

The Tribunal noted that the order reproduced the reply across pages 126–158 but addressed the issues in only two brief paragraphs.

The dispute concerned the period 2012–15.

A quasi-judicial authority must consider the affected party’s submissions and the relevant factual and legal issues, and must provide reasoned findings when adjudicating allegations in an SCN.

It must not prejudge the matter or ignore a party’s reply.

The Tribunal identified no particular statute or precedent by name; it applied these general principles governing quasi-judicial decision-making.

The authority passed its order one day after the appellant filed its reply.

Although the reply was reproduced at length, the order’s brief findings did not show that the SCN allegations and the appellant’s factual and legal submissions had been assessed in their proper perspective.

The Tribunal therefore found that the original authority had not adequately examined the basis for the alleged service-tax liability and that a fresh, detailed fact-finding exercise was required.

The original authority was directed to address all issues raised in the SCNs and grant the appellant a reasonable opportunity of personal hearing.

The Tribunal expected the fresh adjudication to be completed, preferably within six months.