2011 (3) TMI 77

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....orised Representative (JCDR), for respondent   Per: P.G. Chacko   In this application, the appellant prays for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in respect of service tax of Rs.43,75,236/- demanded under the proviso to Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 and also in respect of penalties imposed under Sections 75A, 76 and 78 of the Act. After examining the records and he....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... In an appeal filed against the Additional Commissioner s order, the Commissioner (Appeals) directed them to pre-deposit an amount of Rs.21,87,620/- towards service tax and an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards penalty under Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 35F of the Central Excise Act. This direction, contained in interim order dated 25.9.2008, was not complied with by the par....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hem to the owner of the vessel was covered by ship management service defined under Section 65(105)(zzzt) read with Section 65(96a) of the Finance Act, 1994, but did not consider this plea on merits. Where there was no pre-deposit of the amount determined by the Commissioner (Appeals), he ought to have rejected the appeal on that ground without entering into any discussion on merits. If the learne....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... It appears, it was in the context of considering this modification application that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) chose to deal with the assessee s appeal itself and to reject the same, and that too in the aforesaid strange manner.   4. For the reasons stated above, we set aside the impugned order and direct the Commissioner (Appeals) to dispose of the assessee s modification applic....