2023 (9) TMI 1482 - AT - Service Tax

Seeking early hearing application for expeditious disposal of the appeal - denial of CENVAT Credit - HELD THAT - It is a settled parameter fixed in the Tribunal that only on high involvement of revenue/demand out of turn hearing jeopardizing the rights of the other Appellants who filed their appeals earlier to this appeal applications are not accepted in the normal course unless its impact on the financial stability of the Company or its credit rating is established through documentary proof. No such proof is furnished nor even written note is filed within the due date after conclusion of hearing of the early hearing application despite the fact that Appellant had shown interest to file the same. The early hearing application filed by the Appellant does not merit consideration and the same is rejected.

Summary

Issues involved: Early hearing application for expeditious disposal of appeal due to blocking of working capital and denial of CENVAT Credit amounting to over Rs.255,00,00,000/-.

Early Hearing Application:
The Appellant, represented by their Counsel, requested lenient consideration for early hearing of the appeal due to the significant amount involved, more than Rs.500,00,00,000/-, and the blocking of working capital amounting to Rs.10,00,00,000/- for filing the appeal. The Counsel emphasized the need for expeditious disposal to avoid hindrance in day-to-day business operations.

Objection by Authorised Representative:
The Authorised Representative opposed the early hearing application, citing the lack of precedent judgments in favor of the Appellant. He highlighted the complexity of the appeal, particularly the denial of CENVAT Credit exceeding Rs.255,00,00,000/-, indicating the high turnover of the Appellant Company. The Representative argued that the pre-deposit of Rs.10,00,00,000/- would not significantly impact the Company's financial condition, thus questioning the necessity of expedited hearing.

Tribunal's Decision:
After considering submissions from both parties, the Tribunal noted that special consideration for early hearing is granted only in cases where the financial stability or credit rating of the Company is at risk, supported by documentary evidence. Since no such evidence was provided by the Appellant, and no written note was submitted post-hearing, the Tribunal concluded that the early hearing application lacked merit and was therefore rejected.

(Order pronounced in the open court on 27.09.2023)