M\/s. HEERA CONSTRUCTION CO. PVT. LTD. Versus THE COMMISSIONER CENTRAL GST AND CENTRAL EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CENTRAL TAX AND CENTRAL EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THE BRANCH MANAGAR STATE BANK OF INDIA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AND CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KERALA
Service Tax
2019 (3) TMI 249 – KERALA HIGH COURT – 2019 (366) E.L.T. 270 (Ker.)
KERALA HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 27-2-2019
WP(C). No. 1400 of 2019
Service Tax
MR DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
\nFor The Petitioner : ADVS. SRI.T.M.SREEDHARAN (SR.) MT.DIVYA RAVINDRAN SMT.NISHA JOHN AND SRI. R. BHASKARA KRISHNAN
\nFor The Respondents : ADV. SREELAL N. WARRIER, SC, CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE AND CUSTOMS SRI A KUMAR, SC FOR SBI\n<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n ore, in instalments. In fact, the petitioner wants ten instalments. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" M\/s. HEERA CONSTRUCTION CO. PVT. LTD. Versus THE COMMISSIONER CENTRAL GST AND CENTRAL EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CENTRAL TAX AND CENTRAL EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THE BRANCH MANAGAR STATE BANK OF INDIA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AND CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KERALAService Tax2019 (3) TMI 249 – KERALA HIGH COURT – 2019 (366) E.L.T. 270 (Ker.)KERALA … Continue reading “M\/s. HEERA CONSTRUCTION CO. PVT. LTD. Versus THE COMMISSIONER CENTRAL GST AND CENTRAL EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CENTRAL TAX AND CENTRAL EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THE BRANCH MANAGAR STATE BANK OF INDIA, THIRUVANANTH”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-17137","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17137","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=17137"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17137\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=17137"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=17137"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=17137"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n3. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent nevertheless submits that there had been occasions earlier when this Court extended the time for an appellant to comply with the pre-deposit. But granting such long rope as providing ten instalments, he asserts, is impermissible. About the delay, the learned Standing Counsel wants this Court to leave that to the discretion of the Tribunal.
\n4. Under these circumstances, as far as the delay is concerned, the Tribunal will decide the issue on merits. And about the mandatory pre-deposit, because of the financial hardship the petitioner has pleaded, the petitioner will pay the amount of pre-deposit in five equal monthly<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n