9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 665X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation by the Tribunal. - Taking note of the total amount of demand under the adjudication order amounting to ₹ 74.00 lakhs (approx.), the Tribunal ordered pre-deposit of ₹ 20 lakhs. Tribunal has not considered the legal aspect of the prima facie plea that whether cenvat credit is eligible or not in respect of inputs as well as finished products, as contended by the assessee. However, insofar as inputs consigned by branch office and the claim of service tax on the basis of ST-3 returns, we find that there are some prima facie case in favour of the Department. Therefore, pre-deposit requires to be ordered. The order of the Tribunal dated 07.01.2015 is modified to the effect that the appellant shall make a pre-deposit of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... called upon to pre-deposit the amount ignoring the fact that the appellant is financially incapable of pre-depositing the amount as it has closed down the operations? 2.1. The brief facts of the case in a nutshell are as follows: The appellant/assessee is engaged in the business of executing structural glazing, spider glazing and wall cladding works on high rise and commercial buildings. Alleging that the assessee has availed cenvat credit wrongly to the tune of ₹ 29,22,491/-; irregular cenvat credit taken by the assessee on inputs to the tune of ₹ 14,33,583/-; claim of cenvat credit without valid documents to the tune of ₹ 23,782 and for short payment of service tax to the tune of ₹ 30,10,986/- a show cause n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f ₹ 20.00 lakhs. 2.4 Aggrieved by the said order of the Tribunal, the assessee is before this Court raising the questions of law referred supra. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the assessee and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Department and perused the materials placed before this Court. 4. It is seen that there are two major components in the order, which the assessee is aggrieved. He pleads that pre-deposit may be modified stating that the assessee is entitled to the cenvat credit alleged to have been availed twice one on inputs by the job worker and the another on the finished products to an extent of ₹ 29.00 lakhs (approx.). The other component is the difference between the billed amount and th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... posit requires to be ordered. However, taking note of the submissions of the assessee that the assessee is entitled to claim cenvat credit, some leverage should be given on the plea of cenvat credit and hence the pre-deposit ordered by the Tribunal has to be modified. 7. For the foregoing reasons, we pass the following order: (i) On the question of law raised, we are of the view that the Tribunal was not justified in ordering the pre-deposit in the manner stated in its order dated 07.01.2015; (ii) Consequently, the order of the Tribunal dated 07.01.2015 is modified to the effect that the appellant shall make a pre-deposit of ₹ 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) towards pre-deposit on or before 31.03.2015 and subject to such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
