2016 (2) TMI 548 - HC - Service Tax

Waiver of pre-deposit - appellant submitted that the requirement of ₹ 1.25 crores with proportionate interest as pre-deposit as directed by the Tribunal was unfair and excessive. - Held that - After hearing learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the fact that the appellant has already deposited the principal amount of ₹ 1.25 crores, in terms of order dated 4.11.2015, the instant appeals are disposed of by making the interim order dated 4.11.2015 absolute. The Tribunal is directed to hear the appeals on merits without insisting for any further deposit.

Summary

Issues:
- Disposal of two appeals under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944
- Quantum of pre-deposit as a condition for hearing the appeal by the Tribunal

Analysis:
1. The judgment pertains to the disposal of two appeals under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, where identical questions of law and facts were involved. The appellant, registered under the Service Tax Department for various services, including manufacturing, was issued show cause notices for demand of service tax, interest, and penalties. The appellant challenged the order confirming the service tax demand and penalties before the Tribunal, which directed a pre-deposit of Rs. 1.25 crores with proportionate interest as a condition to hear the appeal on merits.

2. The primary issue in these appeals revolved around the quantum of pre-deposit required by the Tribunal. The appellant contended that the pre-deposit amount of Rs. 1.25 crores with proportionate interest was excessive and unfair. However, the appellant had already deposited the principal amount of Rs. 1.25 crores as per the court's order. The revenue, on the other hand, supported the Tribunal's decision to demand the pre-deposit amount.

3. The High Court, after considering the submissions of both parties and the fact that the appellant had already deposited the principal amount, disposed of the appeals by making the interim order absolute. The Court directed the Tribunal to hear the appeals on merits without requiring any further deposit. This decision was based on the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, ensuring that the appellant's appeal would be heard without any additional financial burden.

This detailed analysis highlights the legal proceedings, arguments presented by the parties, and the final decision of the High Court regarding the quantum of pre-deposit required for hearing the appeals under the Central Excise Act, 1944.