Case Law Details

Case Name : M/s Thames Water Asia (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise (CESTAT Bangalore)
Appeal Number : Service Tax Stay Application No. 564/2009 in Appeal No.915/2009
Date of Judgement/Order : 08/11/2010
Related Assessment Year :
Courts : All CESTAT (607) CESTAT Bangalore (86)

On a careful consideration of the submissions, we find that the issue involved in this case is the very same which was remanded by this Bench vide Final Order No 612/2009 dated 6.5.2009 . We find that vide Stay Order No 1093/2006 dated 06.10.2006 , this Bench had directed the appellant to pre- deposit Rs 14,00,000/- which was duly complied with. Since this amount is still lying with the department, we consider this amount as enough deposit to hear and dispose off the appeal. Application for waiver of the pre-deposit of the balance amount is allowed and recovery thereof stayed till the disposal of the appeal.

IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH AT BANGALORE

Service Tax Stay Application No. 564/2009 in Appeal No.915/2009

M/s THAMES WATER ASIA (P) LTD.

Vs

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BANGALORE

Date of Decision: 08.11.2010

Appellant Rep by: Mr. N Rajpurohit, C A

Online GST Certification Course by TaxGuru & MSME- Click here to Join

Respondent Rep by: Mr. K S Chandrasekhar, JDR

CORAM: Mr. M V Ravindran, Member (J)
Mr. P Karthikeyan, Member (T)


Stay application allowed

STAY ORDER NO. 868/2010

Per: M V Ravindran:

When this stay petition was called out learned Chartered Accountant submits that he is seeking adjournment as his senior is engaged in some other urgent matters. On perusal of the records, we find that the matter can be disposed off at this juncture without granting further adjournment. Hence, the request for adjournment is rejected and stay petition is taken up for disposal.

2. The issue involved in this case is regarding the service tax liability on the assessee as a consulting engineer. The adjudicating authority on remand from the Tribunal has come to the conclusion that the appellant has provided services of consulting engineer. Coming to such a conclusion he has confirmed the demand as indicated herein below:

1) Service Tax of Rs 42,77,809/- 2) Penalty of Rs 42,77,809/- u/s 78 of the Finance Act 1994 3) Penalty of Rs 100/- per day up to 17.04.2006 and thereafter Rs 200/- per day, or 2% of such tax per month whichever is higher u/s 76 of the Finance Act 4) Penalty of Rs 1000/- u/s 77 of the Finance Act 1994

3. Learned Chartered Accountant submits that the very same issue is coming up for the second time before the Tribunal and in the first round, vide Stay Order No 1093/2006 dated 6.10.2006, the. Tribunal had directed the appellant to deposit Rs 14,00,000/- and on such deposit waiver for the balance amount was granted. He submits that the stay order was duly complied with and produces a copy of the TR 6 challan. This amount is still pending with the department.

4. Heard learned DR.

5. On a careful consideration of the submissions, we find that the issue involved in this case is the very same which was remanded by this Bench vide Final Order No 612/2009 dated 6.5.2009. We find that vide Stay Order No 1093/2006 dated 06.10.2006 , this Bench had directed the appellant to pre- deposit Rs 14,00,000/- which was duly complied with. Since this amount is still lying with the department, we consider this amount as enough deposit to hear and dispose off the appeal. Application for waiver of the pre- deposit of the balance amount is allowed and recovery thereof stayed till the disposal of the appeal.

(Pronounced and dictated in open Court)

More Under Service Tax

Posted Under

Category : Service Tax (3286)
Type : Judiciary (9994)
Tags : Cestat judgments (796)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *