https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148409 In an appeal against a service tax demand under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994, the tribunal considered whether pre-deposit was required before the appeal could proceed and whether recovery of the balance demand should be stayed. The renovation contract was not, on a cursory reading, shown to exclude the use of goods, and the appellant's contention that the work was not purely finishing or completion work, with a larger material component, required detailed examination at final hearing. Financial hardship was also treated as relevant to interim relief. The appellant was directed to deposit Rs. 1,00,00,000 within eight weeks, and recovery of the balance demand was stayed on compliance. en-us Fri, 17 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Apr 2013 17:29:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148409 In an appeal against a service tax demand under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994, the tribunal considered whether pre-deposit was required before the appeal could proceed and whether recovery of the balance demand should be stayed. The renovation contract was not, on a cursory reading, shown to exclude the use of goods, and the appellant's contention that the work was not purely finishing or completion work, with a larger material component, required detailed examination at final hearing. Financial hardship was also treated as relevant to interim relief. The appellant was directed to deposit Rs. 1,00,00,000 within eight weeks, and recovery of the balance demand was stayed on compliance. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 17 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148409