TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (2) TMI 56
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....paid to the university and the balance amount is retained by the petitioner's trust. 2. While so, the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Trichy - I issued a Show Cause Notice to the petitioner by his proceedings in C.No.V/ST/30/10/2006-ST-Adj dated 07.06.2006 calling upon the petitioner's trust to pay a total sum of Rs.71,200/- towards service tax of Rs. 70,953 with education cess of Rs. 247/- for a period from July 2003 to march 2005. The petitioner submitted his explanation for the same stating that the service which is rendered by the petitioner's trust does not fall within the scope of Section 65(26) of Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994 and so the petitioner is not liable to pay any Service Tax. Bu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....posit Rs. 71,200/- which is the service tax covered under Impugned Order. He would submit that while considering the petition for stay during the pendency of the appeal, the first respondent is required to consider two main aspects namely (i) Prima Facie case and (ii) Financial position of the petitioner. The learned counsel would rely on a judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Benara Valves Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise reported in 2006(204) E.L.T.513, and a judgement of this Court in Ramaswamy Naidu Textiles Ltd., Vs. CEGAT, Chennai reported in 2003 (157) E.L.T. 636 (Mad.) = 2003 (111) ECR 397 (Madras) and another judgement of this court in W.P. No. 4535 of 2004 M/s. Sri Naga Nanthana Mills L....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....all within the ambit of Section 65(26) of the Finance Act or not. The Tribunal has been prima facie satisfied that the petitioner is not entitled for absolute stay and that is how taking a very lenient view has directed the petitioner to deposit the service tax amount alone. In respect of the financial position of the trust also, admittedly the trust is collecting fees from other students. Even the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Judgement cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner in Benara Valves Ltd. case has held as follows; "12. As noted above there are two important expressions in Section 35(F). One is undue hardship. This is a matter within the special knowledge of the applicant for waiver and has to be estab....