Voluntary investigation deposit is not a pre-deposit and refund is unavailable where status quo continues after remand.

A voluntary deposit made during investigation did not acquire the character of a pre-deposit merely because the earlier adjudication was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh decision. Where the appellate order directed the parties to maintain status quo until reconsideration, the deposit remained a voluntary payment and could not be treated as refundable as a pre-deposit. The refund claim was therefore not maintainable, and the rejection of refund was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether an amount voluntarily deposited during investigation could be treated as a pre-deposit and refunded after the earlier order was set aside and the matter was remanded with a direction to maintain status quo.

Analysis: The amount in question was not deposited as a pre-deposit at the time of filing the appeal. The earlier appellate order had set aside the adjudication and remanded the matter for fresh decision, while directing the parties to maintain status quo until the matter was decided afresh. In these circumstances, the voluntary deposit made during investigation could not be claimed as refundable on the footing of a pre-deposit, and the refund claim was therefore not maintainable.

Conclusion: The refund claim was not tenable and the rejection of refund was upheld against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed, and the departmental rejection of refund was sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: A voluntary deposit made during investigation does not become a pre-deposit merely because the earlier adjudication is set aside and the matter is remanded, particularly where a status quo direction continues to govern the matter.

---