Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

V. Sathyamurthy and Co. Versus Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (Southern Bench) , The Commissioner of Service Tax

2015 (8) TMI 689 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

Waiver of pre deposit - whether the appellant should be made to comply with the order of the Tribunal by depositing ₹ 1 crore more or not - Held that:- Tribunal had relied upon its earlier order dated 31.12.2014, to come to the conclusion that the balance of convenience was in favour of the revenue. But, the Tribunal has omitted to see that the earlier order dated 31.12.2014 had actually been set aside by this Court by the order dated 26.02.2015. Once the order is set aside and the matter .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

J. Rishikesh For the Respondents : Mr. V. Sundareswaran, SPC JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by V. Ramasubramanian,J.) This appeal arises out of an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, directing the appellant to make a pre-deposit of ₹ 2 crores, as a condition for entertaining the appeal. 2. Heard Mr.P.J.Rishikesh, learned counsel for the appellant. Mr.V.Sundareswaran, learned Standing Panel Counsel takes notice for the respondents. 3. The a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s issued, contending that the appellant had rendered services, which attract payment of service tax under various sub sections of Section 65. The total service tax liability of the appellant was quantified at ₹ 7,71,71,776/- for the period from 01.04.2006 to 31.04.2011. 5. Though the appellant was granted an opportunity of personal hearing, the appellant appears to have failed to appear for all the hearings. Therefore, an ex-parte order was passed on 14.02.2014. 6. As against the said orde .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Court. By an order dated 26.02.2015, this court allowed the appeal and remanded the matter to the Tribunal to give one opportunity to the appellant to appear before the Tribunal. 8. After the order of remand, the counsel for the appellant appeared before the Tribunal and after hearing the arguments, the Tribunal passed a fresh order on 03.06.2015, directing the appellant to make a pre-deposit of ₹ 2 crores. This order further directed the appellant to pay only the balance amount after adj .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d by the said order, the appellant is before us. 9. The total liability determined by the original order was ₹ 7,71,71,776/-. Out of the said amount, the appellant has now deposited nearly ₹ 98.60 lakhs. Therefore, the only issue to be considered is as to whether the appellant should be made to comply with the order of the Tribunal by depositing ₹ 1 crore more or not. 10. A perusal of the order of the Tribunal shows that the Tribunal had relied upon its earlier order dated 31.1 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version