9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 329X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... GEMENT Per: Mr. M.V. Ravindran; When this stay petition was called out, after hearing both sides for some time on the stay petition, we find that the appeal itself could be disposed of at this juncture as it lies in a narrow compass, hence we allow the application for the waiver of the pre-deposit of the amounts involved and take up the appeal itself for disposal. 2. The relevant facts that ari ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .19.3 of the impugned order in original and submit that the following data was given to the adjudicating authority. Year Tax Payable Tax Paid Difference 2004-05 Rs. 30,22,900/- Rs. 32,33,114 /- Rs.(-) 2,10,214 /- 2005-06 Rs. 34,99,852 /- Rs. 40,26,803 /- Rs.(-) 5,26,951 /- 2006-07 Rs. 40,65,297 /- Rs. 44,00,282 /- Rs.(-) 3,34,985 /- 2007-08 Rs. 55,96,317 /- Rs. 56,51,438 /- Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the entire period as indicated in the above table. 5. Ld. DR submits that as on date the appellant has not produced the documentary evidence of the amount of tax paid by them as indicated in the table. 6. On careful consideration of the submissions made by both sides, we find that the appellant had in fact clearly indicated in his reply to the show cause notice that they have paid more tax than ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the show cause notice and much more than that. Since the issue needs to be factually verified, we find that the adjudicating authority should be given a chance to verify the said facts. 8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, leaving all the issues open, we set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the adjudicating authority to reconsider the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
