9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 416X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the final order passed by the Tribunal dismissing the appeal for non-compliance of the conditional order - No reason to modify the order of the Tribunal, which has been considerate enough in ordering pre-deposit of approximately 25%, which we find consistently followed by the Tribunal. - Decided against assessee. - Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.3345 of 2014 & M.P.No.1 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 5-12-2014 - R. Sudhakar And R. Karuppiah,JJ. For the Appellant : Mrs. Radhika Chandrasekar For the Respondent : Ms. R. K. Sekina Reshma JUDGMENT (Delivered by R. Sudhakar,J.) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the assessee as against the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal raising the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ategory 'Business Auxiliary Service' . The appellant has also obtained service tax registration for providing the said service to the bank/finance companies. Based on the intelligence gathered that the appellant had evaded payment of service tax by way of suppression of the actual value of service rendered, a show cause notice was issued to the appellant dated 27.04.2007 proposing to demand service tax for the period from 1.7.2003 to 31.3.2006 to the tune of ₹ 97,01,230/-. For the subsequent period, ie., 1.4.2006 to 31.3.2007, 1.4.2007 to 31.3.2008 and 1.4.2008 to 31.3.2009, the appellant was asked to submit details of the amount billed, amount realised and the amount paid towards service tax and education cess. The appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncial hardship, the appellant has not filed any particulars to substantiate the plea of financial hardship in the application filed for pre-deposit before the Tribunal. Hence, the plea of financial hardship without any relevant particulars is not a ground for this Court to entertain this appeal filed as against the final order passed by the Tribunal dismissing the appeal for non-compliance of the conditional order. Paragraph 2 of the order of the Tribunal dated 01.01.2014 reads as follows: 2. The assessee filed an application for waiver of predeposit of tax of ₹ 2,23,71,850/- along with interest and penalty for the period 2006-07 to 2008-09. The demand was raised under the category of Business Auxiliary Service. The applicant is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... son to modify the order of the Tribunal, which has been considerate enough in ordering pre-deposit of approximately 25%, which we find consistently followed by the Tribunal. In this case, we also find that the appeal on this trivial issue of modification of the amount for pre-deposit is consuming more time of this Court, which would be otherwise be used in disposing main appeals. 8. Accordingly, we find no prima facie case to modify the order of the Tribunal. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant seeks six weeks time to deposit the amount. We are not inclined to grant such an extended period of time. 9. For the foregoing reasons, we pass the following order: (i)On the questions of law raised, we are of the view that the Tribu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
