2010 (10) TMI 924

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nsel for the appellant as well as learned Government Advocate Mr. Vedamurthy. 2. According to the appellant Counsel, the appellant being the State Government undertaking, admitted the VAT amount paid by the appellant and disputed amount pertains to the transactions on which Service Tax was leviable. Therefore, there need not be any direction to deposit 50% of the VAT amount demanded by the Depart .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... demanded by the respondents. 5. In the abovesaid case of Apex Court, their Lordships have observed that Supreme Court did not interfere in the interim order particularly with the matters concerned with the levy of Tax. Peculiar circumstances prevailed so as to grant relaxations as the assessees was a public Sector Company handling kerosene distribution system and the demand was for 1.34 crores. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X