9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 242X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ertarn to the same appellants. Hence they are taken up together for common disposal. In the case of Appeal No. ST/347/07 in Stay application No. 236/07 the duty amount is Rs. 7,87,77,447/-. This amount has been deposited. There is an equal amount of penalty and other penalties for which appellants are seeking waiver of pre-deposit. The appellants contention is that the issue has been referred to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Tribunal. 3. We have carefully considered the submissions. We notice that the issue in this matter has been referred to Larger Bench. The appellants have already pre-deposited the service tax amounts. Therefore we are inclined to grant waiver of pre-deposit of penalty amount till the disposal of the appeal. Revenue is barred from recovery even after the lapse of 180 days in view of several judg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it by time bar. 5. Learned SDR submits that there is no res judicata or estoppel in the matter. The clarification has been clearly distinguished in the present case. Therefore, the appellants do not have a strong prima facie case in the matter and as they have not pleaded financial hardship, they should be directed to pre-deposit the amounts to safeguard the revenue interest. Learned SDR submits ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... )]. However, the Commissioner has not accepted the point of revenue neutrality. Denial of credit by the Commissioner is not justified. 7. Learned SDR submits that they have not prod evidence to seek input credit and therefore the question of granting initially the credit without deposit does not arise. Learned Counsel submits that the assessee is paying service tax of more than Rs. 250 crores to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
