9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2012 (11) TMI 492 - AT - Service TaxDemand of service tax along with interest and various penalties were confirmed. - Held that - As appellant has paid the substantial amount out of the amount confirmed against them the pre-deposit of balance amount of service tax, interest and penalty is to be waived - recovery stayed during the pendency of the appeal. As the impugned order is an ex-parte order therefore, in the interest of justice, an opportunity to the appellant to defend their case is to be given - remand the matter back to the adjudicating authority for fresh consideration.
Issues:
Appeal against demand of service tax, non-receipt of notice of hearing, remand for fresh adjudication, waiver of pre-deposit, opportunity to defend the case. Analysis: The appellants challenged an order confirming a service tax demand of Rs.52,27,935/- along with interest and penalties. The counsel argued that they had already paid a substantial amount of Rs.48,85,329/- along with interest, meeting the requirements of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act and Section 83 of the Finance Act. Requesting a stay, the counsel contended that the appellant did not receive a hearing notice during adjudication, leading to a lack of personal appearance before the adjudicating authority. It was emphasized that given the opportunity to appear, the liability could be reduced to Rs.48,85,329/-. Recognizing the payment made, the Tribunal waived the pre-deposit of the remaining amount and stayed the recovery during the appeal, proceeding to finalize the appeal. The Tribunal acknowledged the argument that the impugned order was ex-parte, providing the appellant with an opportunity to defend their case in the interest of justice. Consequently, the matter was remanded back to the adjudicating authority for fresh consideration, with all issues left open for review. The appellants were directed to appear before the adjudicating authority by a specified date to schedule a hearing. The appeal and stay application were disposed of under the stated terms, ensuring a fair opportunity for the appellant to present their case and contest the demand effectively.
|
