Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Prakash Decorators Vs. Cce

Prakash Decorators vs Cce

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Dec 04, 2007
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/46586

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue
Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Prakash Decorators

Respondent

Cce

Legal References

Reported In
(2008)12STJ200CESTATNew(Delhi)

Excerpt

2. ld. counsel on behalf of the applicant submits that the applicant deposited the tax along with interest. he further submits that the adjudicating authority dropped the proceedings, which were revised by the commissioner of central excise.2.1. after hearing both the sides and on perusal of the records, i find that it is sufficient for the waiver of pre-deposit of the penalty amount. accordingly, the pre-deposit of the penalty amount is waived till the disposal of the appeal. the stay application is allowed.

Full Judgment

2. Ld. Counsel on behalf of the applicant submits that the applicant deposited the tax along with interest. He further submits that the adjudicating authority dropped the proceedings, which were revised by the Commissioner of Central Excise.

2.1. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the records, I find that it is sufficient for the waiver of pre-deposit of the penalty amount. Accordingly, the pre-deposit of the penalty amount is waived till the disposal of the appeal. The stay application is allowed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial