9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 501X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dispute had recovered an amount of ₹ 25,11,701/- from their customers towards service tax, the details of which are mentioned in para 9 of the Show Cause Notice and this fact is not disputed by the appellant. Though the appellant s plea is that the substantial amount received by them does not represent the turnover for any taxable service, this plea requires detailed examinations of the records which is possible only at the time of final hearing. - Partial stay granted. - Appeal No. ST/55918/2013- CU[DB] - STAY ORDER NO: 53260 - Dated:- 16-9-2014 - Archana Wadhwa and Mr. Rakesh Kumar, JJ. For the Appellant : Ms. Sukriti Dass, Advocate For the Respondent : Sh. Govind Dixit, DR ORDER Per Rakesh Kumar: The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant for recovery of service tax amounting to ₹ 1,72,17,199/- from them for the period from 2006-2007 to 2010-2011 under Proviso to Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 along with interest thereon under section 75 ibid, appropriation amount of ₹ 11,00,000/- deposited by them during investigation towards the service tax liability and imposition of penalty on the appellant under section 77 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 1.2 The Show Cause Notice was adjudicated by the Commissioner vide Order-in-Original dt. 23.11.2012 by which the above mentioned service tax demand was confirmed against the appellant along with interest and while penalty of equal amount was imposed on them under section 78, the penalty of ₹ 5,000/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that service tax liability of the appellant, at the most, would be about ₹ 11,00,000/- which has already been paid, and in view of this, the requirement of pre-deposit of balance amount of service tax demand, interest thereon and penalty may be waived for the hearing of the appeal and recovery thereof may be stayed. 4. Sh. Govind Dixit, learned DR, opposed the stay application by reiterating the findings of the Commissioner and emphasized that the nature of activity of the appellant is clear from perusal of the various works contracts, that the Appellant has provided the service of dredging taxable under section 65(105)(zzzb), site formation clearances, excavation, earth moving and demolition service taxable under section 6 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is plea requires detailed examinations of the records which is possible only at the time of final hearing. At this prima facie stage, we are of the view that the amount of ₹ 11,00,000/- paid by the appellant is not sufficient to safe guard of the interests, as the amount recovered by the appellant as service tax from their customers, itself, is about ₹ 25,11,107/-. Therefore, the appellant are directed to deposit an amount of ₹ 75,00,000/- in addition to the amount which already been paid by them during the investigation. This pre deposit is to be made within 12 weeks from the order. Compliance to be reported on 18.12.2014. On deposit of this amount within the stipulated period, the requirement of pre-deposit of balance a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
