2014 (4) TMI 130 - HC - Service Tax

Quantum of pre-deposit - Whether the Tribunal is justified to direct deposit of 50% of tax along with interest when the Appellant has provided services of storage of foodgrain and not renting of immovable property - Held that - After hearing learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, another sum of ₹ 50 lacs be deposited as a condition precedent for hearing of the appeal which would meet the ends of justice - Time limit to make pre deposit extended - Decided partly in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act against Tribunal's order
2. Justification of directing deposit of 50% tax along with interest
3. Prima facie case on merits and financial condition
4. Irreparable loss due to order of deposit
5. Perversity and contradiction in the impugned order
6. Quantum of pre-deposit for hearing the appeal
7. Extension of time for pre-deposit

Analysis:

1. The appellant filed an appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act against the order of the Tribunal. The appellant questioned the justification of the Tribunal's direction to deposit 50% of the tax along with interest, arguing that they provided services of storage of foodgrain and not renting of immovable property. The appellant also raised concerns about the strong prima facie case on merits and financial condition, the irreparable loss due to the order of deposit, and the alleged perversity and contradiction in the impugned order.

2. The facts of the case revealed that the assessee provided godowns to the Food Corporation of India for storage of agriculture produce. The audit found discrepancies, leading to show cause notices and subsequent confirmation of duty demand and penalty by the adjudicating authority. The Tribunal then directed the appellant to deposit 50% of the adjudicated liability of service tax along with interest, prompting the present appeal.

3. The appellant sought relief from the court, requesting to hear the appeal without further deposit, citing a previous deposit of Rs. 1 crore as per a court order. The revenue, however, opposed this request, arguing that the amount directed by the Tribunal was reasonable and justified.

4. The primary dispute centered around the quantum of pre-deposit required for the appeal's hearing. After considering arguments from both sides and the overall circumstances, the court ordered an additional deposit of Rs. 50 lakhs as a condition for hearing the appeal, aiming to serve the interests of justice.

5. The court disposed of the appeal accordingly, granting an extension for the pre-deposit deadline until 30.4.2014 in the interest of justice. It was directed that if the appellant deposited the specified amount by the given date, the appeal would proceed to be heard on its merits as per the Tribunal's previous order.

This detailed analysis outlines the key issues raised in the legal judgment, the arguments presented by both parties, and the court's decision regarding the pre-deposit requirement and the subsequent hearing of the appeal.