Tribunal directs agency to respond to notice, deposit Rs. 30,00,000 for service tax. Compliance and cooperation emphasized.

M/s. Khushi Labour Suppliers Versus Commissioner of Central Excise Vapi

M/s. Khushi Labour Suppliers Versus Commissioner of Central Excise Vapi - TMI Issues:
Waiver of pre-deposit of service tax liability, non-filing of reply to show cause notice, service tax liability on Manpower Supply Agency services, verification of deposited amount, need for appellants to file a reply, direction for further deposit, cooperation with authorities.

Analysis:
The judgment revolves around the waiver of pre-deposit of service tax liability confirmed by the adjudicating authority against the appellants. The Tribunal noted that the appellants, controlled by a single proprietor, had not filed a reply to the show cause notice and claimed ignorance of the law. The issue was whether the appellants should be given another chance to present their case before the lower authorities. The Tribunal found that the appellants did not dispute providing Manpower Supply Agency services but contested the amount of service tax liability and technical labor supply tax. The Tribunal emphasized that the non-filing of a reply based on ignorance of the law was not acceptable. They directed the appellants to file a reply within four weeks and deposit an additional amount of Rs. 30,00,000 to ensure compliance and continuation of the proceedings.

Regarding the verification of the deposited amount, the Tribunal expressed inability to authenticate the claim of the appellants depositing Rs. 50 Lakhs. They directed the appellants to further deposit Rs. 30,00,000 within eight weeks and report compliance to the adjudicating authority. The Tribunal clarified that they had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case but stressed the importance of cooperation with the authorities. The appellants were instructed to cooperate, appear for personal hearings, and facilitate the disposal of the matter. The appeals were allowed by way of remand, indicating the need for the appellants to follow the directives provided in the judgment for further proceedings.

In conclusion, the judgment highlights the importance of compliance with legal procedures, including filing replies to show cause notices and making necessary deposits. The Tribunal emphasized the need for cooperation with authorities and directed the appellants to fulfill the requirements outlined to ensure the proper adjudication of the service tax liability issues raised in the case.