9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (2) TMI 702X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... umar, JJ. REPRESENTED BY :Shri R. Krishnan, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Virendra Chaudhary, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Justice R.M.S. Khandeparkar, President (Oral)]. Heard the ld. Advocate for the appellants and ld. DR for the respondent. Placing reliance in the decision of the Larger Bench in the matter of ABB Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Bangalore - 2009 (15) S.T.R. 23 (Tri.-LB) ld. Advocate for the appellants submitted that in view of law being clearly laid down by the Larger Bench, the authorities below erred in denying the credit in relation to Service tax paid on outward transportation. Ld. DR has drawn our attention to the finding arrived at by the Commissioner (Appeals) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The ld. DR has stated that the decision of the Larger Bench has stayed by the Karnataka High Court. 5. Once the decision of the Tribunal is stayed by any High Court, the question of placing reliance on such decision does not arise. Even otherwise, when the orders sought to be challenged clearly disclose the finding about failure on the part of the assessee to produce cogent evidence in support of the contention of the assessee that the supply was on FOR basis, it is difficult to accept the contention on behalf of the appellants. 6. As regards copies of invoices and purchase orders produced for our perusal undoubtedly the same discloses an agreement for supply on FOR basis. But mere agreement cannot be construed as conclusive proof of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onsideration all the facts on record, including the financial hardship which may cause, as also the revenue interest, we are of the considered opinion that this is not a fit case to grant total waiver of the amount demanded under the impugned order. 9. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any justification for insistence of deposit of the penalty amount at this stage. 10. In the result, the application partly succeeds. The amount of penalty demanded under the impugned order is stayed till the disposal of the appeal. With regards to the balance amount demanded under the impugned order, the same shall be deposited within a period of eight weeks. For compliance, report on 24th May, 2010. - - TaxTMI - TMITa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
