9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 33X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... k accounting operated by daughter in law – SCN was issued in the name of firm – appellant and daughter in law submitted that they have not concern with the firm - Held that: - Keeping in view the averments raised by the appellant and the fact that he is an aged person of about 80 years and has no source of income of his own and the fact that he has already deposited a sum of Rs.5.00 lakhs as a pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled challenging the impugned order on various grounds. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as for the respondent. Since the impugned order relate to pre-deposit of Rs.20.00 lakhs, we need not go into the details of facts except mentioning in brief that appellant has averred that he has no concern whatsoever of any kind with M/s.Star Shine Cable Network, which is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was present there, informed the searching officers that his daughter, Ritu, is the proprietor. Bank account of the firm was also stated to be operated by Ritu Prakash. It is averred that service tax authorities issued the notice in the name of the firm at his residential address, 407, Savera Appartments, Rohini. He appeared in response to the notice before the authorities and informed about his ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that he is aged about 80 years and has undergone eyes operation and has no concern whatsoever of any kind with the aforesaid firm. 2. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant also drew our attention to an order passed by another Division Bench of this Court dated 31st January, 2001 in the writ petition filed by the appellant. That case related to demand o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the fact that he has already deposited a sum of Rs.5.00 lakhs as a pre-deposit for hearing the appeal, we are of the view that the pre-deposit order of an additional amount of Rs.20.00 lakhs is not justified. In the given circumstances, we set aside the impugned order to the extent of asking for the pre-deposit of Rs.20.00 lakhs. 4. We may clarify that any observation made by us in this appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
