Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Ramky Enviro Engineers Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 14 October, 2014
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SOUTH ZONAL BENCH BANGALORE INTERIM ORDER No. 22746 / 2014 Appeal(s) Involved: ST/27585/2014-DB Ramky Enviro Engineers Ltd. 6-3-1089/G/16 Gulmohar Avenue Rajbhavan Road, Somajiguda Hyderabad 560 082 Appellant(s) Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax Hyderabad - II Kendriya Shulk Bhavan L.B. Stadium Road Basheerbagh Hyderabad 500 004 Respondent(s)
Appearance:
Mr. B. Venugopal, Advocate Swamy Associates, G-8, Fortuna Icon Apartments, Jodidar Ashwathappa Farm, Sahakara Nagar, Bangalore 560 092 For the Appellant Mr. N. Jagdish, AR For the Respondent CORAM:
HON'BLE SHRI B.S.V. MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER HON'BLE SHRI S.K. MOHANTY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Date of Hearing: 14/10/2014 Date of Decision: 14/10/2014 Order Per: B.S.V. MURTHY Vide Miscellaneous Order Nos. 20932-20933/2014 dated 01.04.2014, the appellant was directed to deposit an amount of Rs. 10 crores and report compliance on 17.07.2014. When the matter was called for reporting compliance, the learned counsel for the appellants moved a miscellaneous application seeking extension of time which was granted and appellant was directed to report compliance today. Today when the matter was called, learned counsel submitted that appellants have deposited Rs. 6.75 crores out of Rs. 10 crores and it is his submission that an amount of Rs. 3.25 crores has already been paid but was not taken note of either by the Revenue or by the appellant. Service tax was demanded on the basis of Balance Sheet turn over reflected and the fact that the appellants had paid on a portion of such amount unfortunately was not submitted by the appellant before the Commissioner nor before the Tribunal. Nevertheless he submits that the service tax already paid has to be taken for the purpose of determining whether pre-deposit has been made or not. Learned AR very strongly opposed this and submitted that it is an omission on the part of the appellant and if an order is passed it would amount to modification of the order already passed by the Tribunal and such modification would amount to review of the order of the Tribunal by the Tribunal which is not permitted.
2. After hearing both the sides for considerable time, in our opinion, the orders passed by us do not require any modification. What is required to be considered is whether the appellant has deposited total amount of Rs. 10 crores or not. If certain amounts already paid was not taken into account throughout the proceedings till the matter reached the Tribunal, there is no harm in taking such amount into consideration for determining whether the appellants have made the pre-deposit as per the order or not. However we do appreciate the concern expressed by the learned AR that this submission unless verified by the Revenue with the cooperation of the assessee should not be accepted. Accordingly we direct the appellant to produce the paper book produced before us today giving details of payments made, P&L Account, Reconciliation of Account, copies of ST-3 Returns and ledger of payments and proof of payments etc. to the jurisdictional Commissioner who shall cause verification of the same and after getting the same verified examine whether the claim of the appellant that they had deposited Rs. 3.25 crores and that has not been taken into account while confirming the demand is correct or not. A copy of the verification report should be submitted to the Tribunal on or before 04.02.2015 and a copy of the report may be given to the appellant also. It is made clear if it emerges after verification that the appellants claim of making the payment is not correct, the appellants have to make deposit of the balance amount and report compliance on 04.02.2015. The matter will come up for taking note of compliance with the above order on 04.02.2015. There will be no notice to both the sides and this order itself has to be considered as notice.
(Operative portion of the order has been pronounced in open court on 14.10.2014) (S.K. MOHANTY) JUDICIAL MEMBER (B.S.V. MURTHY) TECHNICAL MEMBER iss