2015 (6) TMI 991 - AT - Service Tax

Application for modification of stay order - seeking extension of time to make pre-deposit - Held that - Since appellant was given final notice dated 11.02.15 to show cause why the appeal shall not be dismissed for non-compliance. Their miscellaneous application dated 21.04.15 again sought for modification/recall of notice and we find only reiterated their stand on modification of stay which was already considered by this Bench and rejected. Therefore the present miscellaneous application is devoid of any merits and the same is rejected. Since sufficient time was given to the appellants to make pre-deposit of the amount and also final notice issued for dismissal for non-compliance and the appellants failed to comply the stay order dated 26.06.2014 both the appeals are dismissed for non-compliance of the stay order. - Decided against the assessee.

Summary

Issues: Non-compliance with pre-deposit order, verification of payment, dismissal of appeals

Non-compliance with Pre-deposit Order:
The appellants were directed to pre-deposit an amount within a specified period, subject to verification by the service tax department. Despite extensions and multiple opportunities, the appellants failed to comply with the pre-deposit order. The appellants claimed to have already made a deposit, but the Service Tax Commissionerate clarified that the payments made were unrelated to the demanded amount. The Tribunal issued a notice for the appellants to show cause for non-compliance. Despite repeated chances and final notices, the appellants did not make the required payment, leading to the dismissal of the appeals for non-compliance with the stay order.

Verification of Payment:
The appellants claimed to have already deposited a certain amount, which they believed should be considered as part of the pre-deposit. However, the Service Tax Commissionerate confirmed that no such deposit was made in relation to the demanded amount. The Tribunal found that the appellants had not paid any amount as ordered in cash, over and above the claimed deposit. The verification reports clearly stated that the payments made were for regular service tax payments from a different period and not towards the demanded amount, leading to a discrepancy in the claimed deposit.

Dismissal of Appeals:
The Tribunal rejected the appellants' miscellaneous application seeking modification or recall of the notice for non-compliance. Despite giving ample time and opportunities for the appellants to comply with the pre-deposit order, they continuously failed to do so. The Tribunal concluded that the appellants' miscellaneous application lacked merit and dismissed both appeals for non-compliance with the stay order. The final decision to dismiss the appeals was based on the appellants' persistent failure to adhere to the pre-deposit requirements, despite clear directives and notices issued by the Tribunal.