Pre-deposit waiver for mixed-service contract upheld where existing deposit and circular support interim relief

Further pre-deposit of the balance demand was waived during pendency of the appeal because the contract covered multiple activities and was not confined to a single taxable description. The existing order was treated as non-speaking since it did not examine the contractual scope or the nature of the payments in sufficient detail. Taking into account the deposit already made and the Board Circular relied upon, the tribunal considered no additional deposit necessary at the interim stage.

---

---

Issues: Whether further pre-deposit of the balance demand should be waived during pendency of the appeal.

Analysis: The contract executed with the recipient indicated multiple activities and did not confine the work to a single taxable description. The existing order did not examine the contractual scope or the nature of payments received in sufficient detail and was treated as a non-speaking order. In view of the deposit already made by the appellant and the Board Circular relied upon, a further deposit was not considered necessary at the interim stage.

Conclusion: Further pre-deposit of the balance demand was waived during pendency of the appeal.

---