2015 (1) TMI 1492 - HC - Central Excise

Levy of service tax - rejection of application for modification of the term imposed as pre-deposit - HELD THAT - The ends of justice require that the appellant be provided an additional opportunity of hearing on the applications seeking waiver in both the appeals. On the very peculiar facts including the factors which lead the parties to require for opportunity. Thus, taking a lenient view in the matters, the orders impugned in these appeals, i.e., Annexure J and consequential Annexure F orders, are set aside thereby paving way for the CESTAT to consider the applications for waiver of pre-deposit in both the appeals. The appellant is directed to mark appearance before the office of CESTAT South Zonal Bench on 5th February 2015 to obtain appropriate date of listing of the case before CESTAT as may be convenient to the South Zonal Bench. Appeals are disposed of.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to levy of service tax, rejection of application for modification of pre-deposit term by the Tribunal.

Analysis:
The judgment by the High Court of Kerala, delivered by Justice Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan and Justice K. Harilal, pertains to appeals challenging the levy of service tax. The appellants had approached the South Zonal Bench of CESTAT to contest the imposition of service tax. The central issue in these appeals revolved around the Tribunal's decision to reject the application for modification of the pre-deposit term. The appellants argued that their case was similar to matters previously decided by the Tribunal as per Annexure H. The crux of the matter was whether the Tribunal was justified in denying the application for modification of the pre-deposit requirement. The orders under scrutiny, Annexures F and J, essentially mandated the appellant to deposit the entire amount without any waiver of pre-deposit.

Upon hearing the arguments presented by the appellants' counsel and the Senior Standing Counsel for the Central Board of Excise and Customs, the Court determined that the interests of justice necessitated granting the appellant an additional opportunity for a hearing on the applications seeking waiver in both appeals. The Court acknowledged the unique circumstances and factors prompting the parties to seek this opportunity. In a lenient stance, the Court set aside the impugned orders, Annexure J and consequential Annexure F, thereby enabling the CESTAT to reconsider the applications for waiver of pre-deposit in both appeals. The appellant was instructed to appear before the CESTAT South Zonal Bench on a specified date to facilitate the listing of the case for further proceedings.

In conclusion, the appeals were disposed of by the High Court of Kerala, emphasizing the importance of providing a fair opportunity for the appellant to seek a waiver of the pre-deposit requirement before the CESTAT. The judgment underscored the significance of due process and the need to address the specific circumstances leading to the appeal, ensuring a just and equitable resolution in the matter.