2015 (12) TMI 411 - AT - Service Tax

Restoration of appeal - Appeal dismissed for non complaince with pre deposit order - Held that - Appellant though preferred writ petition before Hon ble High Court against the LAA s interim order of predeposit, till date there is no stay order passed by Hon ble High Court against the predeposit order. Therefore, the LAA has rightly dismissed the appeal. Since the LAA has not discussed the issue in detail on merit, we find that it would be appropriate to call for the appellant to make predeposit so as to enable the appellant to appear before LAA to argue on merits - Appeal restored conditionally.

Summary

Issues:
Non-compliance with predeposit order under Section 35F read with Section 83 of the Finance Act leading to dismissal of appeal by the LAA.

Analysis:
The appellant filed an appeal against the Commissioner (Appeals) order where the LAA dismissed the appeal for failing to comply with the predeposit requirement. The adjudicating authority confirmed a demand of &8377; 11,36,029/- along with interest and imposed a penalty under maintenance and repair service. The LAA ordered a predeposit of 50% of the service tax amount confirmed in an interim order. As the appellant did not comply with the stay order, the appeal was dismissed.

The advocate for the appellant mentioned filing a writ petition before the Hon'ble High Court against the predeposit order, which is still pending. The LAA granted an extension of time due to the writ petition's pendency. However, since no stay order was obtained against the predeposit order, the LAA rightly dismissed the appeal for non-compliance.

After hearing both sides, the Tribunal found that there was no stay order from the High Court against the predeposit order. The LAA's dismissal was upheld, but as the LAA did not discuss the issue on merit, the Tribunal directed the appellant to make a predeposit of &8377; 1,25,000/- within four weeks. The appellant was instructed to comply by a specified date and produce proof of payment before the LAA. The appeal was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for further proceedings on merits after the predeposit compliance.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the dismissal of the appeal due to non-compliance with the predeposit order but provided an opportunity for the appellant to make the required predeposit and have the appeal heard on merits by the LAA after compliance.