9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 428X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ered that the amount deposited during pendency of the litigation is nothing but a pre-deposit. It is incumbent for the department to conduct an adjudication for quantifying the demand pursuant to the directions of the CESTAT. Thus, only after the adjudicating authority re-quantifies the amount for the normal period, the appellant would be eligible for refund. In case, there is no excess amount, the appellant would not be eligible for refund. Thus, it is only after re-quantification as per the direction of the Tribunal, the issue of refund would arise. Appeal allowed by way of remand. - Service Tax Appeal No. 40670 of 2019 - Final Order No. 41003/2019 - Dated:- 6-8-2019 - MS. SULEKHA BEEVI, C.S., MEMBER (JUDICIAL) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... original authority for quantification of the demand falling within the normal period. The appellant had deposited ₹ 22,49,339/-towards the service tax demand during the pendency of the litigation. So also, an amount of ₹ 5,74,130/- was deposited towards interest part. On re-quantification by the adjudicating authority, as directed by the Tribunal, the liability of service tax was reduced to ₹ 14,04,040/- and the interest liability was reduced to ₹ 2,35,324/-. The adjudicating authority has appropriated the said amounts. The appellant is eligible for refund of the balance amount. Thus, they filed refund claim on 08.10.2018 within 9 days after passing of the order by the Additional Commissioner quantifying the demand. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 017 has set aside the demand for the extended period and remanded the matter to the original authority for re-quantification of demand for the normal period. It is incumbent for the department to conduct an adjudication for quantifying the demand pursuant to the directions of the CESTAT. Thus, only after the adjudicating authority re-quantifies the amount for the normal period, the appellant would be eligible for refund. In case, there is no excess amount, the appellant would not be eligible for refund. Thus, it is only after re-quantification as per the direction of the Tribunal, the issue of refund would arise. In the present case, the appellant has deposited ₹ 22,49,339/- towards service tax and ₹ 5,74,130/- towards interest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
