2018 (11) TMI 1519 - AT - Service Tax

Failure to make pre-deposit - Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, made applicable to the Service Tax matters under Finance Act, 1994 - Held that - The requirement of Section 35F of the Act, have been complied with, for entertaining the appeal of the appellant. However, since the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed the appeal solely on the ground of noncompliance of the requirement of Section 35F of the Act, and no findings have been recorded with regard to the merits of the case, the matter should be remanded to the learned Commissioner (Appeals) for deciding the issue afresh on the basis of the available records and the submissions to be made by the appellant. Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues: Compliance with Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 in a Service Tax matter.

Analysis:
The appellant appealed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) which was dismissed due to non-compliance with the requirement of Section 35F of the Act. The appellant argued that they had deposited more than the adjudged demand before filing the appeal, constituting sufficient compliance. The authorized representative and the Departmental Representative confirmed the extra deposit made by the appellant. The Tribunal found that the requirement of Section 35F had been met, allowing the appeal. However, since the Commissioner (Appeals) had not assessed the merits of the case and solely dismissed the appeal based on non-compliance, the matter was remanded back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh decision based on available records and submissions. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a reasoned order and granted the appellant an opportunity to be heard before a decision is made.

In conclusion, the appeal was allowed by way of remand, with the Tribunal setting aside the impugned order and sending the matter back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh decision after ensuring compliance with Section 35F and considering the merits of the case.