2013 (11) TMI 590

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r and 25% of the penalty to the Appellants in terms of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994?" By consent, the appeal is taken up for hearing and final disposal. 2. In this appeal, the Appellant has impugned the orders of the CESTAT dated 12 July 2012 and 15 October 2012 passed on an application for stay. 3. The Commissioner, Central Excise, Pune-I Commissionerate by an order dated 26 September 2011 confirmed a demand of Rs. 18.08 crores on account of service tax dues together with interest and imposed a penalty in the like amount on the Appellant. The Appellant filed an appeal before the CESTAT. The appeal is pending. On 23 May 2012, when the stay application was taken up, a ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Rs. 1460.18 lacs against the disputed advances received from customers during the period from April 2006 to March 2011 and balance Rs. 6,24,21,219/- was paid on 22-7-2011 against the unadjusted advances as per books of accounts. Asst. Commr. (STC) seems to have not reported the payment of service tax that was paid over a period of time prior to 22-7-2011. Thus, after payment of a sum of Rs. 6,24,21,219/- the appellants were under belief that they have paid entire amount of service tax on all advances. This is also the statement made by the appellants before the Hon'ble Court. The fact that the appellants filed a certificate (page 105 of the paper book) mentioning the amount of service tax paid by them also proves their bona fide. ... On pla....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n of the Appellant is also contained in the reply filed before the Tribunal to the notice to show cause. 6. The Tribunal discharged the notice to show cause that was issued to the Appellant. As a result of the first order of the Tribunal, dated 23 May 2012, a pre-deposit of interest and penalty was waived on the statement of the Appellant that the entire service tax has been paid. The Tribunal recalled that order on 28 June 2012 since it appeared that the Appellant had paid an amount of Rs. 6.24 crores only, out of Rs. 18.08 crores demanded. The contention of the Appellant as set out in the extract reply cited above is that an amount of Rs. 6.24 crores was paid on 22 July 2011 against unadjusted advances, while service tax of Rs. 1460....