9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 775X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2012 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Central Excise, Jaipur-I ('the Adjudicating Authority'). By the impugned order dated 21.02.2013, the learned Appellate Authority has directed the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs. 35,00,000/-towards the demand in question. The subject-matter of this writ petition being confined to the prayer for interim relief until final disposal of the appeal before the said Appellate Authority, suffice would be to notice, in brief, the relevant background aspects of the matter as follows: The dispute relates to the question of applicability of service tax with respect to road construction work, said to have been executed by the petitioner for M/s Neyveli Lignite Corporation ('M/s NLC'), said to be a comp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner and, while declining to waive the entire amount demanded under the impugned order, has directed the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs. 35,00,000/- within three weeks with the obvious consequential directions that upon making such deposit, the remaining demand shall remain stayed until decision of the appeal but, in case of the petitioner's failure to comply with the directions within the stipulated period, the appeal shall stand disposed of. This writ petition against the aforesaid order dated 21.02.2013 was considered by a co-ordinate Bench on 20.03.2013 and, while issuing notices, it was ordered that the petitioner's appeal would not be dismissed for omission on its part to make the deposit, as ordered, if not already dismissed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s maintained, its rigour deserves to be brought down and softened to the extent of avoiding undue hardship to the petitioner. The Appellate Authority in its impugned order dated 21.02.2013 has observed and directed as under:⁸ "7. After giving careful consideration to fact and circumstances, I am of the prima facie view that the construction or repair of public road has only been provided exclusion from the service tax net and in the instant case, roads have exclusively been constructed by the appellant to facilitate to M/s. NLC for their commercial activities. Therefore, case seeks its propensity in the favour of Revenue. This apart, contention of the appellant with regard to seeking abatement under Notifica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... service tax and thus is not taxable." For the view taken by the Appellate Authority in relation to the case of M/s NLC and then, looking to the fact that the petitioner has an arguable case on merits, it appears just and proper that the petitioner be allowed an opportunity of merit-hearing of the appeal without being forced to deposit an amount equal to the principal demand of service tax. Of course, where the matter would require proper adjudication after hearing the parties and otherwise, pre-deposit remains a statutory requirement, subject to the modification as deemed fit and proper in the case of undue hardship, we are of the view that it would serve the cause of justice if the petitioner is directed to deposit an amount of Rs. 10,00 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
