2013 (9) TMI 359

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....availment of CENVAT credit on capital goods lying in stock as on 16/06/2005. 2. The appellant was admittedly rendering dredging service during the entire period. They were paying service tax on this service at the rate of 10% for the period from 16/06/2005 to 17/04/2006 and at the revised rate of 12% from 18/04/2006 to 30/09/2006. From the records and the submissions, the question arises as to whether, for the period from 16/06/2005 to 17/04/2006 also, the appellant should pay service tax at the rate of 12%. Aforesaid amount of Rs.90,59,361/- is the differential tax for the said period. The case of the appellant is that the entire service pertaining to the impugned demand was rendered prior to 18/04/2006 even though the bills were raised....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....covered from the service recipient at the higher rate. Prima facie, from these documents, it appears that an endeavour was made by the party before the adjudicating authority to prove that the entire dredging activity pertaining to the aforesaid demand of service tax of over Rs.90 lakhs was undertaken prior to 18/04/2006. This prima facie view coupled with the Honble High Courts judgment must yield an order of waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery vis-`-vis the demand of Rs.90,59,361/- and connected penalties. 3. As regards the demand of Rs.61,90,846/-, we find from the records that this demand arises out of denial of CENVAT credit to the said extent taken by the assessee and utilized for payment of service tax. According to the Re....