2022 (11) TMI 1004

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing taxable service of construction. Refund claim of Rs.14,15,694/- was filed by the appellant on 14.3.2019 on the ground that three show cause notices were issued demanding the service tax totalling to Rs. 47,17,804/- for three different periods i.e. 2008-2009, 2009- 2010 and 2010-2011. The said demand was confirmed along with interest and penalties vide the Order-in-Original dated 27.6.2013. The appeal thereof was rejected vide Order-in-Appeal dated 03.02.2014. The appellant approached this Tribunal assailing the said Order-in-Appeal. However, vide Final Order dated 15.3.2016, the appellant was directed to deposit Rs.15 lakhs as pre-deposit. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi was moved by the appellant against this Final Order. On 1.6.2016. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....jected vide the impugned Order-in-Appeal. Being aggrieved the appellant is before this Tribunal. 4. I have heard Shri Umesh Sarwal, learned Counsel for the Appellant and Ms Tamana Alam, learned Authorised Representative for the Department. 5. Learned Counsel for the appellant has mentioned that the amount of refund claim so granted was not the amount of duty. Infact the issue about duty liability of the appellant arising out of three show cause notices (as mentioned above) is still under adjudication. Subsequent to the directions of this Tribunal vide Final Order dated 2.11.2017, the notice of hearing from department has been received by the appellant for such adjudication for 22.11.2022. Hence the amount in question is not the amount tow....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....vide three separate show cause notices of 22.10.2009, 22.10.2010 and 20.02.2011 has yet not finalised. The Original Adjudicating Authority has yet to adjudicate the same pursuant to the directions by the Tribunal to decide the matter afresh in line with the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CCE, Kerala vs M/s. Larsen Toubro Ltd. reported in [2016 1 SCC 170] and also the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Bhyana Builders Pvt. Ltd. reported in [2013 (32) STR 49 (Tri-DEL)]. 8. Perusal makes it abundantly clear that amount in question of above facts is not yet held as the liability of the appellant. The department has no authority to retain such amount which otherwise is the amount of pre-deposit. Hon'ble Apex Court in the ca....