9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (9) TMI 1594 - AT - Service TaxNon-compliance of predeposit - Demand of service tax on construction of residential complex - Held that - During the stay application, the Tribunal has observed that the amount of ₹ 36,63,065/- deposited by the appellant is sufficient compliance of predeposit. We agree to the said observation by the Tribunal in the stay application and matter is remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the issue on merits - appeal allowed by way of remand.
Issues:
Appeal against rejection due to non-compliance of predeposit. Analysis: The appeal was filed against the Commissioner (Appeals) order rejecting it for non-compliance of predeposit. The issue involved was the demand of service tax on the construction of a residential complex. The appellant failed to make the required predeposit of 50% of the confirmed demand of service tax and penalty imposed. During the hearing, the appellant's counsel argued that the amount already deposited by the appellant should suffice as per Section 35F of the Central Excise Act and Section 83 of the Finance Act. The appellant requested a remand to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a decision on merits, citing a favorable decision from a previous Tribunal case. The Assistant Commissioner (AC) representing the respondent supported the findings in the impugned order and also suggested a remand to the Commissioner (Appeals). After hearing both sides and examining the records, the Tribunal found that the amount deposited by the appellant was in compliance with the predeposit requirements. Therefore, the Tribunal agreed with its earlier observation during the stay application and remanded the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a decision on the merits. The Commissioner (Appeals) was directed to consider the decision cited by the appellant's counsel in favor of the appellant while deciding the issue on merits. In conclusion, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed by way of remand to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a decision on the merits.
|
