Writ petition admission and pre-deposit hardship justified continuation of ad-interim protection against coercive recovery.

The writ petition raised whether it should be entertained at the admission stage despite the availability of a statutory appeal, with the petitioner contending that the pre-deposit requirement would make that remedy onerous in view of the service tax demand. The Court noted the existing ad-interim protection against coercive recovery and accepted that the matter did not require immediate hearing. Rule was issued, and the earlier ad-interim relief was confirmed, allowing the petition to proceed further.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition should be entertained at the stage of admission and whether the ad-interim protection earlier granted should continue.

Analysis: The impugned demand was stated to be appealable, but the petitioner asserted that the statutory appeal would not be efficacious because the pre-deposit requirement would be onerous in view of the magnitude of the service tax demand. The Court also noted that an earlier order had protected the petitioner from coercive recovery and that the matter did not require immediate hearing, as requested by the respondent.

Conclusion: Rule was issued and the earlier ad-interim relief was confirmed, leaving the petition to proceed further.

---