Prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit accepted on service tax demands, with stay granted pending appeal.

A stay application in service tax litigation considered whether the appellant had made out a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit on demands under business auxiliary service and manpower recruitment or supply agency service. On the business auxiliary service demand, the appellant invoked the export of service framework, and the education cess calculation was noted as potentially erroneous; a prima facie case was found, supporting waiver and stay. On the manpower recruitment or supply agency demand, earlier waiver orders and a comparable final order were relied on, and a strong prima facie case was also found, justifying full waiver and stay. The application was allowed in full and further proceedings were stayed pending appeal.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the appellant had a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit and stay in respect of the demand raised under the head of business auxiliary service and the alleged error in computation of education cess; (ii) Whether the appellant had a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit and stay in respect of the demand raised under the head of manpower recruitment or supply agency service.

Issue (i): Whether the appellant had a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit and stay in respect of the demand raised under the head of business auxiliary service and the alleged error in computation of education cess.

Analysis: The appellant claimed immunity for the business auxiliary service demand on the basis of the export of service framework. The demand relating to education cess was also noted as appearing to involve a computation error.

Conclusion: A prima facie case was found in favour of the appellant on these aspects, warranting waiver of pre-deposit and stay.

Issue (ii): Whether the appellant had a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit and stay in respect of the demand raised under the head of manpower recruitment or supply agency service.

Analysis: The appellant relied on earlier orders granting waiver of pre-deposit in similar matters and a final order taking a comparable view. In that backdrop, the demand under this head was treated as disclosing a strong prima facie case for the appellant.

Conclusion: A strong prima facie case was found in favour of the appellant on this issue as well, justifying full waiver of pre-deposit and stay of further proceedings.

Final Conclusion: The stay application was allowed in full and further proceedings pursuant to the adjudication order were stayed pending disposal of the appeal.

---