2012 (6) TMI 93

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ear 2006-07 is before the Tribunal and stay against the recovery of the same has already been granted, matter is pending before the Tribunal and stay has been granted, it cannot be said that this amount has been confirmed, proper procedure to be followed would have been to wait for the outcome of the appeal filed by the appellant and pending before the Tribunal and before reaching the conclusion t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rder No. 882/2009 dated 25-5-2009 [2010 (19) S.T.R. 547 (Tri.-Bang.)]. 2. In the meanwhile in April, 2007, the appellant adjusted an amount of Rs. 4,82,768/- treating the same as excess payment made by them during the year 2006-07 out of the service tax payable by them during the relevant period. The Department initiated proceedings proposing that this adjustment was not correct in view of the f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Rs. 9,11,520/- has already been confirmed as a demand which is much more than Rs. 4,82,768/- adjusted. However, in view of the fact that the matter is pending before the Tribunal and stay has been granted, it cannot be said that this amount has been confirmed. In these circumstances, the proper procedure to be followed would have been to wait for the outcome of the appeal filed by the appellant a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X