2010 (1) TMI 453 - AT - Service Tax

Transport of goods by road service - The issue involved in this case is eligibility of abatement under Notification No. 32/2004, dated 3-12-2004. lower authorities denied said benefits on ground that assessee had not produced relevant declaration on consignment notes. Held that- matter is remand back as the Connissioner (Appeals) had rejected appeal filed by assessee for non-compliance of pre-deposit.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Eligibility of abatement under Notification No. 32/2004, dated 3-12-2004.

Analysis:

1. Pre-Deposit Waiver:
The appellant filed a stay petition seeking waiver of predeposit of various amounts, including service tax, interest, and penalties. The Tribunal, after hearing both sides, decided to dispose of the appeal itself due to the narrow compass of the issue. The Tribunal dispensed with the condition of pre-deposit and proceeded with the appeal's disposal.

2. Commissioner's Decision:
The Commissioner (Appeals) had rejected the appellant's appeal for non-compliance with the pre-deposit order. The primary issue in this case revolved around the eligibility of abatement under Notification No. 32/2004. The Revenue contended that the appellant should have produced a declaration on consignment notes, while the appellant's counsel argued that previous decisions favored the assessee. The Tribunal noted that the matter required a thorough examination on merits and observed that the issue appeared to be settled by various Tribunal decisions.

3. Tribunal's Decision:
In light of the above considerations, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a decision on merits. The Commissioner was directed to provide the appellant with an opportunity for a hearing without insisting on any predeposit of the adjudged amounts. The Tribunal allowed the appeal by way of remand, thereby disposing of the stay petition as well.

This judgment highlights the importance of examining issues on their merits, considering relevant legal precedents, and ensuring procedural fairness in tax matters. The decision underscores the Tribunal's role in ensuring a just and thorough adjudication process while balancing the interests of both parties involved in the dispute.