9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 563X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri Atul Gupta learned counsel for the Appellant and Shri Manish Raj learned Authorized Representative for the Revenue. 3. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that * these applications for early hearing have been filed as the issue involved is in very narrow compass. The appeal was dismissed by the Commissioner (Appeals) for want of pre-deposit, as he did not considered the pre-deposit made through DRC-03 as proper pre-deposit. * Subsequently, for filing this appeal they have made the deposit of entire 10% in cash before the Tribunal. * As there is no order on merits the matter needs to be remanded back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for decision on merits. 4. Learned Departmental Representative has no objection. 5. For the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection (1) of section 35B, unless the appellant has deposited ten per cent. of the duty, in case where duty or duty and penalty are in dispute, or penalty, where such penalty is in dispute, in pursuance of the decision or order appealed against: Provided that the amount required to be deposited under this section shall not exceed rupees ten crores: Provided further that the provisions of this section shall not apply to the stay applications and appeals pending before any appellate authority prior to the commencement of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2014. 4.3 I also find that Hon'ble High Court of Mumbai in the case of Nimbus Communications Limited vs. Commissioner of S.T., Mumbai-IV reported as 2016 (44) S.T.R. 578 (Bom.), held, as und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of Act-HELD: When statute itself makes it clear that right of appeal is subject to certain restrictions with effect from particular date, general rule that law relating to appeal which is vested right that accrues to litigant as on date of commencement of lis will not be applicable It was more so as C.B.E. & C. Circular No. 984/08/2014-CX, dated 16-9-2014 clarifled that amendment applies to appeals filed after 6-8-2014-Hence, assessee was liable to deposit 7.5% or 10%, as case may be, for preferring appeals. [paras 11, 17] Pre-deposit-Service Tax - Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994 stipulates itself that provisions of Central Excise Act, 1944 were applicable in relation to Service Tax as they applied in relation to duty of Excise Hence, p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5] Hon'ble Delhi High Court has held as follows: "9. Therefore, there is no dispute about the fact that 7.5% was initially deposited before the Commissioner (Appeals) at that time when the integrated portal did not exist. Thereafter, while approaching the CESTAT, the remaining 2.5% has been deposited by the Petitioner. Thus, in effect the entire 10% which is the pre-deposit amount, stood deposited. 10. Considering these circumstances, the appeal could not have been rejected merely on the ground that it was deposited on a wrong account especially when the said integrated portal was not even available for the Petitioner at the time of the initial deposit. 11. Following the decision of the Bombay High Court in Sodexo India Services Pvt. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
