The Commissioner of Service Tax, Goa passed an order-in-original and confirmed the service tax liability on the Appellant. The Appellant preferred an appeal before the Hon’ble CESTAT by making a pre-deposit (7.5 per cent of the tax demand confirmed by the learned Commissioner). Despite such compliance, the Deputy Director, DGCEI, Goa wrote a letter to the Appellant’s bankers to remit the amounts (credit balance) lying in the account of the Appellant in order to credit the same with the Government exchequer against the dues.

The Bench Observed as under:

…

3. After considering the submission made by both sides, we find that the impugned order has been passed on 28.11.2014 and received by the appellant on 01.12.2014. Aggrieved by such an order, the appellant preferred and appeal before this Bench which has been numbered as ST/85150/15-Mum and the appellant has complied with the mandatory requirement of depositing of 7.5% of the total duty liability. In our considered view and as also statutorily once mandatory deposit of 7.5% has been made, there is no reason for recovery of any further amount from the appellant and the action of the Dy. Director, DGCEI seems to be beyond the scope of law. In our view, there is no need to freeze the account of the appellant as long as the appeal is pending before this Bench. Accordingly, we direct the lower authorities, specially the Dy. Director, DGCEI, Goa to defreeze the account forthwith by issuing appropriate instructions to the appellant’s bankers.