Pre-deposit compliance: payment of service tax and interest was enough to restore the appeal for hearing on merits.

Deposit of service tax with interest was treated as sufficient compliance for hearing the appeal, so further pre-deposit of penalty was not insisted upon. The earlier dismissal for non-compliance with the pre-deposit direction was set aside, and the appeal was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for decision on merits without requiring any additional deposit.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal dismissed for non-compliance with the pre-deposit direction should be restored and whether deposit of service tax with interest was sufficient to permit adjudication of the appeal on merits without insisting on further pre-deposit of penalty.

Analysis: The appellants had already deposited the service tax and interest. In the circumstances, such deposit was treated as sufficient for hearing the appeal. The earlier order insisting on further pre-deposit was therefore not sustained, and the matter was required to be considered on merits by the lower appellate authority.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the appeal was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for decision on merits without insisting on any further pre-deposit.

---