2023 (3) TMI 892

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....#39;BLE MR JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR For the Appellants : By Sri. Neeralgi Jeevanbabu Jagadish, Advocate For the Respondent : By Shri. V. Raghuraman, Senior Advocate For Shri. Bhanu Murthy J.S., Advocate JUDGMENT P.S. DINESH KUMAR J., 1. This intra-Court appeal by the Revenue is directed against Order dated 21st December, 2020 passed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....;s case and took note of the pre-deposit of Rs.27,66,646/- and came to the conclusion that 50% of the demand (Rs.1,77,06,985/-) equivalent to Rs.88,53,492/- earlier deposited, has already been appropriated. Accordingly, the relief was denied under the scheme and passed the order as per Annexure-B, making an estimated amount payable at Rs.60,86,846.50. Challenging the said order, assessee filed the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... scheme and as per the conditions of the scheme, assessee is required to deposit 50% of the disputed amount. Therefore, the impugned order is unsustainable because the amount which was not subject matter of the claim under consideration by the Designated Committee has been taken into account. Amplifying his arguments, he submitted that what was the consideration before the Designated Committee was....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... does not call for any interference. 8. We have carefully considered the contentions and perused the records. 9. Undisputed facts of the case are, assessee had indeed deposited Rs.2,52,46,749/-. The show-cause notice demand is for Rs.1,77,06,985/-. 50% of the same comes to Rs.88,53,492/-. Admittedly, assessee's amount of Rs.92,00,000/- is already with the Revenue. 10. It is the conten....