Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
A.S.V. Rao & Co vs Commissioner Of Customs, Central ... on 20 May, 2014
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SOUTH ZONAL BENCH BANGALORE Final Order . 20860 / 2014 Application(s) Involved: ST/COD/26952/2013 in ST/26613/2013-DB ST/Stay/26953/2013 in ST/26613/2013-DB Appeal(s) Involved: ST/26613/2013-DB [Arising out of order-in-appeal No. 62-2012 dated 11/09/2012 passed by Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax ( Appeals), GUNTUR] A.S.V. Rao & Co E.1, A Colony, Ibrahimpatnam, KRISHNA DIST - 521450 AP Appellant(s) Versus Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax GUNTUR NULL P.B.NO. 331...C.R.BUILDING, KANNAVARI THOTA, GUNTUR, - 520004 ANDHRA PRADESH Respondent(s)
Appearance:
None For the Appellant Mr. N. Jagadish, A.R. For the Respondent CORAM:
HON'BLE SHRI B.S.V.MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER HON'BLE SHRI S.K. MOHANTY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Date of Hearing: 20/05/2014 Date of Decision: 20/05/2014 Order Per : B.S.V.MURTHY Appellant was directed to deposit assessed service tax liability with interest within 12 weeks and report compliance on 28/10/2013 vide miscellaneous order No. 26560 to 26561/2013 dated 08.07.2013. On 28.10.2013 when the matter was called, it was informed that appellant had filed the appeal before the Honble High Court and on the basis of this submission, the matter was adjourned.
2. Today when the matter was called, nobody is present on behalf of the appellant. However, written submissions have been received in connection with the compliance report. At this juncture, we also find the decision of the Honble High Court on record wherein the matter was remanded to this Tribunal for fresh hearing. The Honble High Court also observed that the petitioner would be entitled to produce authenticated material to substantiate the fact of its financial undue hardship.
3. On going through the written submissions, the appellant has stated that in the past three accounting years, according to the income tax returns, appellant has made a profit of Rs. 3,25,350/- in the year 2011-2012; Rs. 2,63,457/- in the year 2012-13 and Rs. 2,51,500/- in the year 2013-14. According to the appellant, it is a well known fact that when a business man makes losses in his business and if he does not show profit in income, banks will not give loans and will recover existing loans therefore the appellant had made false declarations and showed a small profit in each financial year. We express our inability to consider this submission. In the absence of any evidence of financial difficulty duly authenticated, as observed by the Honble High Court, we do not find any merit in the submissions made before us. Accordingly, the appeal is rejected for non-compliance with the requirement predeposit before this Tribunal in terms of provisions Section 35-F of the Finance Act 1994 made applicable to service tax matters.
(Operative portion of the order has been pronounced in open court) S.K. MOHANTY JUDICIAL MEMBER B.S.V.MURTHY TECHNICAL MEMBER Pnr..
2