2015 (1) TMI 1194 - AT - Service Tax

Waiver of pre deposit - Non consideration of certain amount already paid - Held that - If certain amount already paid was not taken into account throughout the proceedings till the matter reached the Tribunal, there is no harm in taking such amount into consideration for determining whether the appellants have made the pre-deposit as per the order or not. However we do appreciate the concern expressed by the learned AR that this submission unless verified by the Revenue with the cooperation of the assessee should not be accepted. Accordingly we direct the appellant to produce the paper book produced before us today giving details of payments made, P&L Account, Reconciliation of Account, copies of S.T.-3 Returns and ledger of payments and proof of payments etc. to the jurisdictional Commissioner who shall cause verification of the same and after getting the same verified examine whether the claim of the appellant that they had deposited ₹ 3.25 crores and that has not been taken into account while confirming the demand is correct or not. A copy of the verification report should be submitted to the Tribunal on or before 4-2-2015 and a copy of the report may be given to the appellant also. It is made clear if it emerges after verification that the appellant's claim of making the payment is not correct, the appellants have to make deposit of the balance amount and report compliance - Appeal disposed of.

Summary

Issues:
1. Compliance with pre-deposit order of Rs. 10 crores.
2. Consideration of amount already paid by the appellant.
3. Verification of the claimed payment by the Revenue.
4. Consequences of incorrect claim by the appellant.

Analysis:
1. The appellant was directed to deposit Rs. 10 crores as per a previous order. However, during subsequent proceedings, it was revealed that the appellant had deposited only Rs. 6.75 crores out of the total amount. The appellant claimed that an additional Rs. 3.25 crores had been paid but not accounted for. The issue revolved around whether the total pre-deposit amount had been made or not, considering the discrepancy in the amount deposited.

2. The Tribunal acknowledged the appellant's submission regarding the Rs. 3.25 crores already paid but not considered earlier. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of verifying this claim to ensure accuracy. It directed the appellant to provide detailed documentation, including payment records, P&L Account, and proof of payments, to the jurisdictional Commissioner for verification. The Tribunal highlighted the need for cooperation between the Revenue and the appellant in this verification process.

3. The Tribunal set a deadline for the verification report to be submitted by the Revenue, emphasizing that if the appellant's claim of payment was found to be inaccurate, the balance amount would need to be deposited. The Tribunal scheduled a compliance hearing for the appellant on a specified date. It clarified that no further notice would be issued, and the order itself served as notice for the parties involved.

4. The Tribunal's decision focused on ensuring transparency and accuracy in the pre-deposit process. It highlighted the significance of proper verification by the Revenue to determine the actual amount paid by the appellant. The consequences of an incorrect claim were clearly outlined, emphasizing the need for compliance with the Tribunal's directives. The order aimed to resolve the discrepancy regarding the pre-deposit amount and maintain procedural integrity in the legal proceedings.