9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 632X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt : Mr. Sukhdev Sharma, Advocate AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the assessee under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (in short, "the Act") against the orders dated 30.8.2013 (Annexure A-9) passed by the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") and dated 3.4.2013 (Annexure A-7) passed by the Com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 1000/- was imposed as personal penalty which was duly deposited. The Government issued a notification dated 20.6.2013 (Annexure A-1) exempting the value of all the taxable services as is equal to the value of the goods and materials sold by the service provider to the recipient of services. Another notification dated 1.3.2006 (Annexure A-2) was issued providing abatement of 67% of gross value ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd also imposed penalties of Rs. 5000/- under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 and Rs. 29,84,848/- under Section 78 of the said Act. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) [for brevity "the Commissioner (Appeals)"] who vide order dated 17.12.2012 (Annexure A-6) imposed the condition of pre-deposit of Rs. 10,00,000/-. Since the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he amount as directed by the Commissioner (Appeals) was reasonable and justified. 5. The primary dispute that arises for consideration in this appeal relates to the quantum of pre-deposit to be made by the appellant as a condition precedent for the hearing of the appeal by the Tribunal. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
