Madras High Court bench of Justice R. Subramanian and Justice N.Sathish Kumar has held that the pre-deposit payment made by the parent company having a separate service tax registration amounts to proper complianc THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR C.M.A(MD)No.577 of 2015 and
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 08.04.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
C.M.A(MD)No.577 of 2015 and
M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2015
M/s.St. John CFS Part Pvt. Ltd.,
Harbour Express Road,
Tuticorin – 620 008. … Appellant /Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Commissioner of Central Excise,
Central Revenue Building,
NGO A Colony, Tirunelveli.
2.The Custom, Excise and Service Tax,
Appellate Tribunal,
South Zonal Bench, 1st Floor,
No.26, Haddows Road,
Chennai – 600 006. … Respondents/Respondents PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 35G of the
Central Excise Act, 1944, praying this Court to set aside the Final Order
No.40651/2014, dated 13.10.2014 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai.
For Appellant : Mr.K.Vaitheeswaran
For Respondents : Mrs.S.Ragavendhre
Jr. Standing Counsel
JUDGMENT
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J. AND
N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.
This appeal is directed against the final order
No.40651/2014 of the Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, dated 13.10.2014, dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant for non-compliance of the conditions imposed for grant of stay.
- By an order, dated 14.06.2013, the appellant company
was directed to make a pre-deposit of Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs only) and report compliance on 02.08.2013. At that relevant point of time, an application for merger of the appellant company with
M/s.St.John Freight System Limited, was pending.
- Taking note of the pendency of the merger proceedings,
the parent company namely, M/s.St.John Freight System Limited, deposited the money as directed by the conditional order. The Tribunal has refused to accept such deposit as a proper compliance with conditional order passed, because both the companies had separate service tax registration. It now turns out that the parent company, which has deposited a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs only) pursuant to the interim order is under liquidation. The appellant cannot be penalized for the error. The appellant has to be given an opportunity to have its appeal heard on merits.
- No doubt, the Tribunal was justified in concluding that
the deposit by the parent company, which had a separate service tax registration, cannot be taken as a proper compliance, at the same time, the order of the Tribunal imposing a condition has been complied with an ends, we find that such a rigid view would only result in the appeal being thrown out on a technical ground, thereby, resulting a denial of opportunity to the appellant.
- We therefore, direct the payment made by the parent
company to be taken as a payment made by the appellant company for the purposes of the compliance with the interim order alone. We therefore, set aside the order of the Tribunal. The appeal is restored to file. The Tribunal is requested to dispose the appeal on merits.
- With the above direction, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal
is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[R.S.M., J.] & [N.S.K., J.]
08.04.2022
Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No rm
To
1.The Commissioner of Central Excise,
Central Revenue Building,
NGO A Colony, Tirunelveli.
2.The Custom, Excise and Service Tax,
Appellate Tribunal,
South Zonal Bench, 1st Floor,
No.26, Haddows Road, Chennai – 600 006.
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
AND
N.SATHISH KUMAR, J. rm
JUDGMENT IN
C.M.A.(MD)No.577 of 2015
08.04.2022
