C. ADHIMOOLAM Vs. REGISTRAR, CESTAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Cuddalore passed an order dated 17-2-2010 determining the service tax payable by the petitioner, besides penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The said order was unsuccessfully challenged before the second respondent. The second respondent passed an order dismissing the appeal on the ground of limitation. The said order was challenged before the first respondent. The appeal is stated to be pending before the first respondent. The petitioner has filed an application for waiver of pre-deposit. The said application is also pending. The action taken by the fourth respondent to recover the service tax appears to be the reason for filing this writ petition challenging the original order, as confirmed by the appellate authority.

(2.) The appeal filed by the petitioner is now pending before the first respondent. It is for the first respondent to take up the appeal on merits. In case, the first respondent is of the view that pre-deposit cannot be waived, necessarily, the petitioner has to deposit the pre-deposit amount. When the appeal is pending before the first respondent, it is not open to the petitioner to challenge the very same order before this Court. It is not open for the petitioner to initiate parallel proceedings before various forums challenging the very same order. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the contention taken by the petitioner. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.