9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (1) TMI 429X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... day or at the rate of two percent of such tax per month, which ever is higher, till the date of payment; and (iv) Penalty of Rs. 5,000/- under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. The above amounts have been confirmed by the adjudicating authority on the ground that the appellant is providing services under the category of 'Tour Operator Services'. It is also recorded by the adjudicating authority that the appellant had not reflected the correct value of taxable services in the ST-3 returns filed by them for the period October, 2006 - March, 2007. It is also noticed from the records that, the adjudicating authority has not accepted the contentions of the appellant that Some of the vehicles are run with permit No. KMV-47 and majority of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ngalore v. Sunil S. Kotian [2007 (6) S.T.R. 379 (Tri. - Bang.)] (xi) CCL, Vadodara-II v. Gandhi Travels [2007 (6) S.T.R. 430 (Tri. - Ahmd.)] (xii) Best Call Taxi v. CCE, Coimbatore [2007 (7) S.T.R. 218 (Tri. - Chennai)] He also drew our attention to the permits issued by Karnataka State Transport Authority which indicate that the vehicles were in fact registered as 'private service vehicles'. He also drew our attention to the 'Agreement for Services' entered into by the appellant with various Companies, and submits that they clearly indicate services are for pick up & drop of employees in shifts as per the schedule and the requirements given out by the companies. 3. The learned SDR submits that in the appellant's own case in identical i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... time of final disposal of the appeal. We find that all the case laws cited by the learned Counsel need to be gone into details to the facts of the case to the case in hand, which requires detailed hearing. We are of the considered view that appellants have not made out a prima facie case for complete waiver of the amounts adjudged by adjudicating authority, hence they need to be put to some conditions. Considering the fact that the appellant had already deposited an amount of Rs. 23,66,188/- during pendency of the proceedings before the lower authority, we direct the appellant to pre-deposit further an amount of Rs. 25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty five lakhs only) within a period of eight weeks from today and report compliance on 22 March, 2010 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
