9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (2) TMI 88X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ies with the impugned order dated 29.11.2010, in Appeal No.ST /440/2010 and ST/269/2010 passed by the learned CESTAT , within three weeks from today, the appeal itself be disposed of by the CESTAT within a period of three months thereafter. - Writ Petition No.4262 of 2011 - - - Dated:- 28-2-2011 - VVS Rao and Ramesh Ranganathan , JJ Appellant Represented by: Mr Joseph Prabhakar, Adv. Respondent Represented by: Mr A R Reddy, Sr. Counsel JUDGEMENT Per: VVS Rao: 1. The petitioner is a company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956, in Andhra Pradesh. They obtained service tax registration for providing commercial or industrial construction services like erection, commissioning and installation services and constr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e prima facie case and, therefore, it is vitiated by improper exercise of power vested in the Tribunal under Section 35F of the Act. He would rely on Mehsana Dist. Co.op Milk P.U . Ltd v Union of India (2003) 154 ELT 347 (SC) . Nextly he would urge that _undue hardship_, which is the requirement for waiver of pre-deposit, also includes financial hardship and, having regard to the well known fact that the amounts deposited by the petitioner for availing the remedy of appeal, even after the appeal is allowed, would be returned after several years, if the waiver of pre-deposit is not granted, the petitioner would suffer undue hardship. Learned Counsel would contend that the non-speaking order passed by the learned Tribunal suffers from error ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d, it was certainly against the petitioner. The Tribunal, taking into consideration of the matter with reference to abatement from taxable value, gave relief to the extent of benefit of abatement of taxable value of the works and directed pre-deposit of only Rs.2,66,00,000 /- as a condition for grant of an order of waiver, and stay of recovery. The question is whether the order suffers from any grave error apparent on the face of record warranting exercise of certiorari jurisdiction of this Court. In CCE , Guntur v M/s. Sri Chaitanya Educational Committee, Poranki , Vijayawada, CEA No.301 of 2011, dated 19.1.2011, on an analysis of the relevant case law, this Bench enumerated the following principles to be kept in mind while considering the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
