9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 39X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the Commissioner of Service Tax dated 31-1-2012 by which, the Commissioner demanded Service Tax of Rs. 59,09,543/- for the period from July, 2007 to December, 2009 under proviso to Section 73(1) of the Finance Act r/w Section 73(2) of the Act. Further the assessee was directed to pay interest for non-payment of service tax in terms of Section 75 of the Act and though penalty equivalent, to the amount of the Service Tax was demanded under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 (The Act), however taking note of the contentions raised by the assessee, the penalty was reduced to 25% of the service tax demanded. The assessee was also directed to pay an amount of Rs. 6,061/- for interest short-paid. Further no penalty was imposed under Section 76 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the fact that the appellant had paid service tax on flats sold to third parties even prior to the introduction of explanation to Section 65(105)(zzzh) w.e.f. 1-7-2010 and therefore the benefit of waiver of pre-deposit ought to be given to the appellant? 4. In the memorandum of appeal, the assessee has stated that when the case came up before the Tribunal for hearing on 24-9-2013 certain details were sought for by the Tribunal and the assessee sought further time. Thereafter the matter was adjourned to 31-12-2013 and in the meanwhile, the father of the counsel for the appellant expired and the counsel was away from the station owing to certain religious formalities and returned only during the last week of December. Further it is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 31-12-2013, prima facie appears to be genuine in the absence of any rebuttal for the same. Considering the above fact and also the contention that the assessee has already paid a sum of Rs. 83,44,454/- out of the total demand, we deem it appropriate that the assessee should be given an opportunity to place all the materials before the Tribunal. It also appears that the Department representative who appeared before the Tribunal had not placed before the Tribunal, the amounts paid by the assessee prior to the issuance of the show cause notice as claimed by the assessee in the application seeking stay/waiver of pre-deposit. 7. In view of the above, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. The matte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
