2012 (7) TMI 194

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... deposit of Service Tax of Rs.1,77,587/- and of Rs.2,95,072/- with interest and the penalties under Sections 76 and 78 of Finance Act, 1994.   2. The above said amounts have been confirmed by adjudicating authority and upheld by first appellate authority on the ground that the appellant is not eligible for availing the benefit of Notification No.1/2006-ST, dt.1.3.2006 for 40% abatement of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... cation and more specifically to the proviso attached to the notification.   5. Ld.SDR submits that the issue was not put in this perspective before the lower authorities.   6. On careful consideration of the submissions made by both sides, we find that the issue involved needs to be appreciated on factual matrix. It is the claim of the ld.Counsel that they have not availed CENVAT Credi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he records and it is better done by the adjudicating authority.   8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, keeping all the issues open, we remand the matter back to adjudicating authority to reconsider the issue afresh, after following the principles of natural justice.   9. The appeal is allowed by way of remand.   (Dictated & Pronounced in Court .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X