Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Gdc Creative Advertising Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs ,Central ... on 4 December, 2014
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SOUTH ZONAL BENCH BANGALORE Final Order No. 22338 / 2014 Application(s) Involved: ST/COD/21505/2014 in ST/21323/2014-DB ST/Stay/21506/2014 in ST/21323/2014-DB Appeal(s) Involved: ST/21323/2014-DB [Arising out of 08-2012 dated 09/12/2013 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax , HYDERABAD-II( Appeal) ] GDC Creative Advertising Pvt Ltd Plot No. 8-2-601/b/19, Road No. 10, Banjarahills HYDERABAD - 00 AP Appellant(s) Versus Commissioner of Customs ,Central Excise and Service Tax Hyderabad-iv POSNETT BHAWAN, TILAK ROAD, RAMKOTI, HYDERABAD, - 500001 ANDHRA PRADESH Respondent(s)
Appearance:
Shri Ramsharma Chandara, Advocate For the appellant.
Dr. A.K. Nigam, Addl. Commissioner(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: 04/12/2014 Date of Decision: 04/12/2014 Order Per : B.S.V.MURTHY The impugned OIA dt. 09/01/2013 and according to the stamp on the last page it was dispatched on 25/03/2013. However it is the submission of the appellants that they did not receive. Only after the demand letter is received asking them to pay the service tax demanded, they requested for a copy which was provided to them and thereafter they filed the appeal immediately. In the absence of any evidence of service of the OIA, we consider that in this case, the delay has to be condoned.
2. It was submitted by the learned counsel that appeal has been dismissed for non-compliance with the requirement of predeposit ordered by the Commissioner(Appeals). The Commissioner(Appeals) had directed the appellant to deposit the tax amount by 12/12/2012. Predeposit of interest and penalty were waived.
3. It is the submission of the appellant that the order itself was dispatched much later and as a result the appellant could not make the payment. Further he also submits that on the very same issue for a different period, the matter had come up before the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide Misc. Order No.20297/2014 dt. 12/02/2014 had granted unconditional waiver of predeposit and stay against recovery. In view of the fact that in the case of the very same appellant for a different period on the very same issue, this Tribunal did not consider it is necessary to direct predeposit of any amount and granted the unconditional waiver of predeposit and stay, we consider that the Commissioner(Appeals) also can hear the appeal without insisting on predeposit. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Commissioner(Appeals) with a request to deposit the appeal without insisting on any predeposit. Stay application also gets disposed of.
(Operative portion of the order has been pronounced in open court) S.K. MOHANTY JUDICIAL MEMBER B.S.V.MURTHY TECHNICAL MEMBER Raja.
2