Appellant challenging Tribunal order imposing service tax demand and directing deposit with waived penalty. High Court found no substantial question of law and dismissed appeal in limine as appeal had no substance.
Appeal dismissed as having no substance; no further relief grantable in limine.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
TAX CASE (C) No. 37 of 2016
---- Appellant
Versus
---- Respondent
For Appellant : Shri Amrito Das, Advocate. For Respondent : Shri Manish Sharma, Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Pritinker Diwaker Hon'ble Shri Justice Chandra Bhushan Bajpai
Order On Board By Justice Pritinker Diwaker
13/06/2016
Vide order-in-original dated 16.3.2012 passed by the Commissioner, Central Excise & Customs, Raipur, the demand of service tax to the tune of Rs.60,30,799/- was confirmed and it was also ordered that the amount be recovered along with interest and penalty as imposed. This order was subjected to challenge before Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal and vide impugned order, the Tribunal has directed the appellant to deposit service tax along with interest, waiving the penalty. It is this order passed by the Tribunal, which has been challenged by the appellant in the present appeal.
is not interfered with, the appellant would suffer an irreparable loss because attachment order is likely to be issued. It has been pointed out that out of Rs.60,30,799/-, a sum of Rs.42,19,825 has been deposited between 16.6.2007 & 2.3.2015 and thereafter, Rs.14,26,967/- has also been deposited on 15.12.2015. He submits that as major portion of service tax has already been deposited, the Tribunal ought to have waived the remaining amount along with interest and penalty.
Sd/ Sd/
(Pritinker Diwaker) (C.B. Bajpai) Judge Judge
Khan
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should entertain the appeal against the Appellate Tribunal's order when the appellant faces attachment risk due to non-deposit.
Whether a substantial question of law arises to interfere with the Tribunal's order where the appellant has partially deposited the amount.
M/s Soni Construction A Proprietorship Concern, Through The Proprietor, Sanjay Soni
Commissioner, Customs And Central Excise
Pritinker Diwaker
Chandra Bhushan Bajpai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
