JAYALAKSHMI EXPORTS Vs. CCE (ST)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application filed by the appellants in Appeal No. S/186/2006 says that there is a mistake apparent from the record in Final Order No. 1257/2006 dated 7.12.2006 passed by this Bench. It is submitted by learned Counsel for the applicant that they are entitled to consequential relief once their appeal stands allowed. It is submitted that the applicant had paid the amount of service tax on 8.8.2006 as a predeposit for the appeal. As the appeal has been allowed, the appellant is entitled to return of the predeposit. I have heard learned JDR also, who is of the opinion that any refund of predeposit cannot be ordered without an application therefor.

(2.) AFTER examining the records, I note that the service tax amount was paid as a predeposit for the purpose of the appeal as evidenced by the relevant challan available on record. Where the appeal is allowed, the appellant should get back the amount predeposited. However, in the final order, this relief was, by mistake, denied to the appellant on the ground that there was no claim for refund in the memo of appeal. This mistake, contained in the conclusive part of the final order requires to be rectified. Accordingly, the last two sentences in para 7 of the impugned order will be deleted and the following sentence will be substituted: In the case of M/s. Jayalakshmi Exports, appellants in Appeal No. S/186/2006, there is a predeposit of the service tax amount under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 and therefore the said party will be entitled to return of the predeposit without having to file any formal application therefor. The application is allowed to the above extent.