ORDER D.N. Patel, J.: 1. This writ petition has been preferred for quashing and setting aside all four notices dated 9th May, 2012 which are at Annexure2 series, out of which one issued to service recipient, another is to JUSCO, third to Axis Bank and 4th to Bank of Baroda mainly for the reason that these notices were issued in pursuance of show cause notice passed by the Additional Commissioner, Central Excise, Jamshedpur signed on 29th July, 2011. 2. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that this show cause notice has been adjudicated upon by the Additional Commissioner and he passed an order on 30.07.2012 thereafter, the said order was challenged before the Commissioner (Appeals) (insisting for deposition of the amount) and therefore, the order was passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) to deposit the much higher amount and hence, the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) was challenged before the CESTAT and ultimately, passed an order dated 31st March, 2014 which was signed on 2/3rd April, 2014 and the order was passed to deposit only Rs. 8.36 lakhs instead of Rs. 49,90,780/and the matter was remanded for fresh decision to be taken by the Commissioner (Appeals). 3. The Commissioner (Appeals) passed a fresh order and the matter was remanded to Additional Commissioner, Central Excise and Service Tax, Jamshedpur, who passed an order dated 20th November, 2014, which is at Annexure6 to the memo of this petition which is in favour of this petitioner and the liability imposed upon this petitioner is to deposit Rs. 16,24,671/and the said amount has already been deposited with the respondents and therefore, the notice issued by the respondents which are at Annexure2 series all dated 9th May, 2012 must be quashed and set aside and let a fresh notice be issued upon the respondents under Section 87 of the Finance Act, 1944. 4. Counsel for the respondents submitted that the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Central Excise and Service Tax, Jamshedpur, dated 28th October, 2014 (Annexure 6) has been challenged by the respondents before the Commissioner (Appeals) as stated in para3 of the counter affidavit filed by the respondents (at page8) and therefore, at this stage, Annexure2 series notice may not be quashed and set aside. 5. 5. Having heard counsels for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby, quash and set aside all the four notices dated 9th May, 2012 which are at Annexure2 series out of which one is issued to the service recipient, 2nd to JUSCO, 3rd to Axis Bank and 4th to Bank of Baroda mainly for following facts and reasons: (i) Respondents had issued show cause notice to this petitioner dated 20/29th July, 2011 under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 for the payment of the service tax, totaling to Rs. 49,90,780/. (ii) Thereafter, the said show cause notice issued by the Additional Commissioner, Central Excise, Jamshedpur was adjudicated upon vide order dated 30th July, 2012. (iii) The said order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Central Excise and Service Tax, was challenged by this petitioner before the Commissioner (Appeals) as per statutory requirement the amount of Rs. 49,90,780/was deposited, until and unless this amount is deposited the appeal cannot be heard. Despite the argument for waiver of the deposition the Commissioner (Appeals) have not waived any amount and therefore, the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) challenged before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata, Eastern Zonal Bench and the CESTAT passed an order dated 31st March, 2014 signed on 2/3rd April, 2014 and had ordered that Rs.8.36 lakhs will be deposited before the Commissioner (Appeals) and the matter will be heard on merits by the Commissioner (Appeals). This matter was remanded by CESTAT. (iv) Thereafter, Commissioner (Appeals) heard the matter and as this petitioner had deposited Rs.8.36 lakhs, the Commissioner (Appeals) remanded the matter to Additional Commissioner, Central Excise and Service Tax, Jamshedpur for his fresh decision. The order was passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) is dated 14.08.2014. In pursuance of this order fresh order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Central Excise and Service Tax, Jamshedpur on 28th October, 2014 the liability has been reduced to Rs.16,24,670.81p. This amount has already been deposited by this petitioner before the government with equal amount of penalty and further Rs.20,000/maximum or Rs. 200/per day for delay, in submission of the record, was also imposed. Thus, the total liability comes to Rs. 33 lakhs as per the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Central Excise and Service Tax. This amount has already been deposited by this petitioner before the government with equal amount of penalty and further Rs.20,000/maximum or Rs. 200/per day for delay, in submission of the record, was also imposed. Thus, the total liability comes to Rs. 33 lakhs as per the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Central Excise and Service Tax. (v) Thus, the notice issued at Annexure 2 series all dated 9th May, 2012 are not sustainable because they were based upon the order which is now quashed and set aside. (vi) It is submitted by the counsels for the both the sides that the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Central Excise and Service Tax, Jamshedpur dated 28th October, 2014 (Annexure6) has been challenged by this petitioner as well as by the respondents before the Commissioner (Appeals). These facts make no difference for quashing and setting aside the notice at Annexure2 series mainly for reason that the very purpose of issuance of show cause at Annexure2 series is no more in existence. 6. As a cumulative effect of the aforesaid facts and reasons, we hereby, allow this writ petition and quash and set aside the four notices all dated 9th May, 2012, which are at Annexure2 series. The respondents are at liberty to issue fresh notice upon the petitioner for recovery of the tax dues.