2008 (4) TMI 188 - AT - Service Tax

Refund of pre-deposit was granted even when the appellant was liable to pay tax as per Order-in-Appeal without ensuring that the tax liability gets discharged, refund was allowed - CBEC is asked to look into the circumstances in which the refund was allowed to the appellant and, if need, take suitable disciplinary action against erring officials in accordance with law.

Summary

Issues:
1. Confirmation of service tax demand with penalties
2. Appeal against order-in-appeal setting aside demand and penalties
3. Refund of pre-deposited amount
4. Non-cooperation in quantifying outstanding demand
5. Conduct of the appellant
6. Adjournment and listing of appeal
7. Inquiry into refund issuance

Issue 1: Confirmation of service tax demand with penalties
The Additional Commissioner confirmed a service tax demand of Rs. 10,42,255 with interest and imposed various penalties under Sections 75, 76, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.

Issue 2: Appeal against order-in-appeal
The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the service tax demand on certain charges and penalties. Both the appellant and the Department appealed to the Tribunal against this order.

Issue 3: Refund of pre-deposited amount
During the appeal, it was discovered that the appellant received a refund of the pre-deposited amount despite remaining liable to pay service tax. The Tribunal questioned the refund issuance without ensuring the tax liability was discharged.

Issue 4: Non-cooperation in quantifying outstanding demand
The appellant did not cooperate with the Department in quantifying the outstanding demand as per the order-in-appeal, leading to a delay in passing a suitable order regarding pre-deposit/stay under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act.

Issue 5: Conduct of the appellant
The Tribunal expressed disapproval of the appellant's conduct, noting their failure to ensure tax liability discharge and lack of cooperation with the Department. Despite considering a positive order on pre-deposit, the Tribunal deferred the decision to allow the appellant another chance to comply.

Issue 6: Adjournment and listing of appeal
The appeal was adjourned to a later date to quantify the outstanding demand and consider pre-deposit/stay. It was scheduled to be listed along with the Department's appeals before the Bench presided over by the President.

Issue 7: Inquiry into refund issuance
The Tribunal directed the Central Board of Excise & Customs (CBEC) to investigate the circumstances of the refund issuance to the appellant and take disciplinary action against any erring officials if necessary, in accordance with the law.