2013 (5) TMI 503 - AT - Service Tax

First appellate authority rejected the appeal for non-compliance with the pre-deposit of 25% of the amount of service tax confirmed by the adjudicating authority. - held that - the appellant may be covered under the services which has been classified by the lower authorities site formation and clearance, excavation and earth moving and demolition services. - the said works contract specifically talks about exclusion of extraction of lignite work from the scope of the work which has been given to the appellant. But the said lignite extraction was to be done subsequently. These are prima-facie views. - Commissioner was fair enough to direct the appellant to deposit an amount of 25% of the service tax liability confirmed by the adjudicating authority. We do not find that the said order is unreasonable. Accordingly, the appellant is directed to deposit 25% of the service tax liability confirmed by the adjudicating authority.

Summary

Issues:
Stay petition for waiver of pre-deposit of service tax, interest, and penalties under Section 76 & 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. Compliance with pre-deposit under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Classification of services under works contract.

The judgment addresses a stay petition seeking the waiver of pre-deposit of an amount confirmed as service tax, interest, and penalties under the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal, after hearing both sides, decides to dispose of the appeal itself at the current stage. The main issue revolves around the non-compliance with the pre-deposit requirement of 25% of the service tax amount confirmed by the adjudicating authority. The first appellate authority found the appellants in violation of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, due to non-compliance.

Upon reviewing the works order issued by M/s. GHCL, the Tribunal considers the services provided by the appellant, which include site formation, clearance, excavation, earth moving, and demolition services. The works contract explicitly excludes lignite extraction work initially but allows for it subsequently. The Tribunal acknowledges these prima facie views and agrees with the Commissioner's decision to direct the appellant to deposit 25% of the service tax liability confirmed by the adjudicating authority. The Tribunal deems this directive fair and reasonable, ordering the appellant to comply within twelve weeks and report back to the first appellate authority.

The Tribunal refrains from delving into the merits of the case as the first appellate authority did not provide any findings on the case's substance. Upon the appellant presenting evidence, the Tribunal restores both the appellant's and the Revenue's appeals to their original numbers and resolves to dispose of them based on their merits. Ultimately, the stay petition and appeal are disposed of as per the recorded directives, emphasizing compliance with the deposit requirement and further proceedings before the first appellate authority.