2013 (3) TMI 449

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ection 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 83of the Finance Act, 1994 with regard to the amount of pre-deposit to be made by the petitioner. 2. As per the order-in-original, which is the subject matter of the appeal before CESTAT, a demand of service tax of approximately Rs. 3.57crores has been raised against the petitioner. A penalty of Rs. 4 crores has also been imposed on the petitioner. As against this, the Tribunal has directed that the petitioner should deposit a sum of Rs. 1 crore in three instalments, namely, Rs. 40 lacs by 20.02.2013, Rs. 30 lacs by 20.03.2013 and Rs. 30 lacs by 10.04.2013. The petitioner has already deposited the first instalment of Rs. 40 lacs. The petitioner is before us seeking waiver of de....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....extended period of limitation inasmuch as there has been, according to the petitioner, no wilful suppression or concealment on the part of the petitioner. Therefore, in any event, the show cause notice ought to have been issued within the period of one year and it is only the demand for the period of one year before the date of issuance of the show cause notice that could be raised, if at all. He submitted that if the period of one year is taken, then the entire demand would be reduced to approximately Rs. 7 lacs, as against which the petitioner has already deposited a sum of Rs. 40 lacs. 5. The learned counsel for the respondents, however, submitted that the demand raised under the order-in-original specifically indicates that the expen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rsement from its clients. The figure of Rs. 37.55 crores includes the direct expenditure incurred by the petitioner for which no reimbursement was claimed nor given. That can never be added on to the figure of professional fees which has been charged for by the petitioner and paid for by the clients and on which service tax has already been levied and collected. 7. As per the financial statements of the petitioner, total revenue, on account of transactions between 01.10.2002 and 31.03.2007, came to approximately Rs. 57.58 crores. Out of this, the billing for professional service was a figure of approximately Rs. 33 crores. The expenditure for which the reimbursement was claimed and billed by the petitioner was to an extent of approximate....