Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + HC Service Tax - 2017 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (5) TMI 241 - HC - Service Tax100% EOU - CENVAT credit - commission paid to foreign agents - pre-removal expense or not? - Whether the CESTAT, Chennai erred in its decision which is based solely on the judgment of the CCE, Jallandhar VS Ambika Overseas [2010 (7) TMI 330 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI] and that of Ms.Cadila Health Care Ltd., Vs. CCE, Ahmedabad [2009 (8) TMI 172 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD] which has not reached finality as the department has gone on appeal to High Court? - Held that: - Given the fact, that one judgment i.e., the judgment rendered in Ambika Overseas has been confirmed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, whereas, the other judgment i.e., Cadila Healthcare Limited has been reversed by the Gujarat High Court, we are of the view that the matter would have to be remanded to the Tribunal, for a fresh adjudication, on merits. Whether the decision of CESTAT is correct in law as it had not gone into the facts and circumstances of the case in hand in detail and passed the order without discussing in detail the merits of the case which appears to be different than the facts of the case that were relied upon? - Held that: - the impugned judgment and order is set aside, with a direction to the Tribunal to decide the matter, on merits, as expeditiously as possible Appeal allowed by way of remand.
|