Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (5) TMI 330

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y predeposit. Prior to 06.08.2014, the Section 35F of Central Excise Act as made applicable by Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994 included the procedure to file stay application along with appeal. The Tribunal then had to consider the stay applications and direct to make predeposit in order to grant stay of recovery of the demand by the department. After introduction of new Section 35F w.e.f 1.8.2014, the assessee has been cast with the responsibility of making a mandatory predeposit. The procedure of filing stay application has been given away with. The requirement to make mandatory predeposit implies that the recovery proceedings are stayed during pendency of the appeal before the Tribunal. Coming to the merits of the case, the Commissioner .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 1.10.2016 to 30.6.2017 as per the details given below : Year Income as per 26AS ST-3 value Difference 26AS and ST-3 value Total ST to be paid Oct 2016-March 2017 5,38,30,707 Not Filed 5,38,30,707 80,74,606 April 17 - June 2017 2,46,02,855 Not Filed 2,46,02,855 36,90,428 Total 7,84,33,562 Not Filed 7,84,33,562 1,17,65,034 2. It appeared to the Department that appellant though rendered the services as per Section 65B (44) of the Finance Act, 1944 had not discharged service tax for the activities carried out in the nature of 'Business Auxiliary Service'. Show cause notice dt. 28.04.2022 was issued to the appellant proposing to demand the service tax for the period October 2016 to June 2017 along with interest and for impo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ad moved the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court by filing a Writ Petition No.35856/2023. The Hon'ble High Court vide judgment dt. 21.12.2023 directed the Tribunal to dispose of this appeal within a time period of 3 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 4. It is submitted that though the appellant had informed the adjudicating authority to keep the matter in abeyance, the adjudicating authority has passed the de novo order in a hurried manner and thereby denied the appeal remedy of the appellant. 5. On merits, the Ld. Counsel submitted that the appellant engages lorry for transportation of agricultural produce and the same is exempt as per Sl.No.21, 22 of Mega Notification No.25/2012 dt. 20.6.2012. The appellant had furnish .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and therefore the argument of the appellant cannot be accepted. The appellant having not registered with the Department and not paid any service tax, the demand confirmed is legal and proper. The appellant has not produced documents pertaining to the disputed period and therefore the adjudicating authority could not take note of contention of transportation of agricultural produce. Ld. A.R prayed that the appeal may be dismissed. 8. Heard both sides. 9. The foremost issue for consideration is the manner in which the original authority has passed the de novo order. The Commissioner (Appeals) vide order impugned in this appeal had remanded the matter. It is to be noted that the present appeal has been filed by the appellant after complying .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... before CESTAT Chennai on 22.8.2023 and Appeal ST/40504/2023 is pending before the Tribunal. In spite of this, de novo order has been passed. We find that de novo order so passed by the adjudicating authority during the pendency of the appeal before this Tribunal is in violation of principles of natural justice, against the provisions of law and requires to be set aside. Ordered accordingly. 10. Coming to the merits of the case, the Commissioner (Appeals) has analysed the issue and after considering the submissions made by the appellant that they are eligible for exemption under Sl.No.21, 22 of Notification No.25/2022 has remanded the matter to verify whether the transportations were made for agricultural produce. Taking note of this fact a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates