ORDER : D.N. PATEL, J. 1. This writ petition has been preferred challenging the order passed by CESTAT, Kolkata dated 27th November, 2015 (which was received on 8th December, 2015) in Appeal No. ST/75252/15 (Annexure-14) and also for declaration that the entire proceedings right from show-cause notice is void ab-initio as per Section 73(1) of the Finance Act. 2. Having heard counsels for both sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that this petitioner is a franchise of M/s. Aakash Institute, as per Annexure-1 page no. 26 of this petition. This petitioner is running a coaching class. The Input Tax Service Provider is Aakash Institute and the Franchise Centre of this petitioner is at 3rd Floor, Arya Business Centre, 1Club Road, Ranchi. The name of this petitioner was not reflected in the invoice as per page no. 34-part of Annexure-2. This mistake has been rectified and now the name of this petitioner has been introduced in the invoices as per page no. 68-part of Annexure-5. 3. Thus, it appears that the aforesaid aspect of the matter has neither been properly appreciated by A.O. nor by Appellate Authority nor by the Tribunal. The notices issued by the respondents have been received either on the same day of hearing or later on. 4. This petitioner has deposited Rs. 11,00,000/- before this Court in pursuance of an order passed by this Court dated 22nd November, 2016. Thus, the Order-In-Original passed by the Additional Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Ranchi dated 13th May, 2011 is an ex-parte order. 5. We therefore, quash and set aside the said Order-In-Original and consequential orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) as Order-In-Appeal dated 6th September, 2012 and further consequential order passed by CESTAT, Kolkata dated 27th November, 2015 (Annexure-14) and we hereby, remand the matter to the Additional Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Ranchi, for passing fresh Order-In-Original more particularly when Annexure-1franchise agreement has also not been placed on record before Additional Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax while passing the Order-In-Original. The amount deposited before this Court can be withdrawn upon proper application filed by the petitioner. 6. Counsel appearing for the petitioner has also raised issue about the limitation and maintainability. The amount deposited before this Court can be withdrawn upon proper application filed by the petitioner. 6. Counsel appearing for the petitioner has also raised issue about the limitation and maintainability. Looking to Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 to be read with Rule 9(2) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, the petitioner is at liberty to raise all the questions of law, facts and place evidences upon which the petitioner is relying upon before Additional Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Ranchi and the decision will be taken by the Additional Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Ranchi on the basis of the evidences on record and in accordance with law as early as possible and practicable. Order-In-Original will be passed without being influenced by the orders passed in earlier proceedings like earlier Order-In-Original, Order-In-Appeal and the order, passed by the CESTAT, Kolkata. 7. This petition is allowed and disposed of.