2018 (9) TMI 395 – MADRAS HIGH COURT – TMI – De-freezing of Bank Account – bank account was freezed on the reason that the petitioner has failed to pay the service tax, in pursuant to a demand resulting out of the said order passed on 05.03.2018 – educational services.
–
Held that:- It is seen that the petitioner suffered an order in original dated 05.03.2018 passed by the first respondent imposing service tax as well as penalty. It is not in dispute that as against the said order, the petitioner has right of appeal before the CESTAT. It is also not in dispute that such appeal can be filed only by making pre-deposit of the statutory liability, as contemplated under the relevant provision of law, while filing such appeal. Since it is stated that freezing of the subject matter bank account has totally paralysed the petitioner's day to day activities, this Court is of the view that the respondents 1 and 2 shall have to permit the petitioner to operate the bank account initially, atle
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ding educational services in logistics and shipping. According to the petitioner, the petitioner institution, will not fall under the purview of educational institutions liable to pay service tax. However, pursuant to issuance of show cause notice, the first respondent passed an order of assessment on 05.03.2018, imposing service tax and penalty on the petitioner. As against the said order, an appeal remedy is available to the petitioner before the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai and such appeal shall have to be filed within the time stipulated under the relevant enactment. In the meantime, the subject matter bank account of the petitioner, being operated at the third respondent bank, has been frozen, on the reason that the petitioner has failed to pay the service tax, in pursuant to a demand resulting out of the said order passed on 05.03.2018. 5.The grievance of the petitioner before this Court is that by freezing the said account, the respondents 1 and 2 h
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
g service tax as well as penalty. It is not in dispute that as against the said order, the petitioner has right of appeal before the CESTAT. It is also not in dispute that such appeal can be filed only by making pre-deposit of the statutory liability, as contemplated under the relevant provision of law, while filing such appeal. Since it is stated that freezing of the subject matter bank account has totally paralysed the petitioner's day to day activities, this Court is of the view that the respondents 1 and 2 shall have to permit the petitioner to operate the bank account initially, atleast for the purpose of effecting the pre-deposit, while filing the statutory appeal before the CESTAT. Therefore, I find that to that extent, the petitioner is entitled to operate the said account so that his right of filing of appeal before the CESTAT is not defeated for want of making pre-deposit. 8.Needless to say that the petitioner can file appropriate interim application before the Appellate
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =