2019 (11) TMI 380 - AT - Service Tax

Restoration of application for condonation of delay - the application for condonation of delay filed by the appellant was dismissed for non prosecution - appellant has deposited almost 40% of the service tax demanded - HELD THAT - Considering that the appellant has deposited almost 40% of the service tax demanded which is reasonable, the recovery of the remaining amount of service tax demand is stayed and the matter is remanded to the first appellate authority to consider the matter on merits and pass a reasoned order, after following the principles of natural justice. The application for condonation of delay is allowed - The application for stay of recovery of unpaid amount of service tax , interest and penalties is allowed - The matter is remanded to the first appellate authority for a decision on merits.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Condonation of delay in filing the appeal, non-compliance of stay conditions, underpayment of taxes, imposition of penalties, remand to first appellate authority.

Condonation of Delay in Filing the Appeal:
The appellant's application for condonation of delay was dismissed twice for non-prosecution by CESTAT, Hyderabad. Subsequently, a writ petition was filed before the High Court of Telangana, which allowed the petition, setting aside the Tribunal's order. The High Court directed the Tribunal to take up the condonation of delay application and dispose of it in accordance with the law. Consequently, the delay of 197 days in filing the appeal was condoned by the Tribunal, and the matter was taken up for a final decision.

Non-Compliance of Stay Conditions:
The appellant, a contractor providing taxable services, was issued a show cause notice for underpayment of taxes. The Ld. Original authority confirmed the demand, interest, and imposed penalties. The first appellate authority dismissed the appeal for non-compliance with the conditions of stay granted, requiring pre-deposit of the entire amount of service tax confirmed. As the appellant failed to comply, the appeal was dismissed. The Tribunal noted that the appellant had paid only a portion of the total service tax demanded and filed a stay petition seeking waiver of the remaining amount.

Underpayment of Taxes and Imposition of Penalties:
The appellant was alleged to have underpaid taxes, leading to a show cause notice for differential service tax. The Ld. Original authority confirmed the demand and imposed penalties under relevant sections of the Finance Act, 1994. The first appellate authority dismissed the appeal due to non-compliance with the pre-deposit condition, leading to the present appeal before the Tribunal.

Remand to First Appellate Authority:
Considering that the appellant had paid around 40% of the service tax demanded, the Tribunal stayed the recovery of the remaining amount and remanded the matter to the first appellate authority for a decision on merits. The Tribunal directed the first appellate authority to consider the matter on its merits, pass a reasoned order, and follow the principles of natural justice. Consequently, the application for condonation of delay was allowed, along with the application for stay of recovery of the unpaid amount of service tax, interest, and penalties. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.