Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + HC Service Tax - 2022 (10) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (10) TMI 924 - HC - Service TaxJurisdiction - appropriate forum - High Court or Supreme Court - Classification of services - Erection, Commissioning or installation Service or not - laying, connecting, joining pipeline for water supply project - entitlement for abatement under N/N.1 of 2006, dated 1st March 2006 - HELD THAT:- Sub-section (2) to section 35L was inserted with effect from 6th August 2014, i.e., prior to the passing of the order impugned in the present appeal by the CESTAT. Even otherwise, this Court in the case of THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE MUMBAI – V COMMISSIONERATE VERSUS M/S. RELIANCE MEDIA WORKS LTD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S. ADLABS FILMS LTD.) , SHRI VASANJI ASARIA MAMANIA, SHRI SATYAJEET MUKHERJEE [2019 (12) TMI 392 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] has held that insertion of sub-section (2) to section 35L was clarificatory, and therefore, the issue of taxability and excisability would be an issue relating to rate of duty of excise/services for the purpose of assessment for which an appeal from the order of the Tribunal could be entertained only by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and not by the High Court in terms of sections 35G of the Excise Act. In view of the clear mandate, sub-section (2) of section 35L of the Excise Act, since the issue involved in the present appeal pertains to whether the service rendered by the assessee is a taxable service or not, this Court would have no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. The present appeal is not maintainable before this Court leaving it free to the appellant to avail its remedies under law - Appeal dismissed.
|