9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 436X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n-Appeal No. 72/ST/2010 dated 31.03.2010. 2. Heard the ld. A.R. for the Department. None present for the respondent. 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the respondents herein are rendering service in the category of Consulting Engineering , who alleged to have violated various provisions of the Finance Act, 1994 including non-registration with the Service Tax Department and failure ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ovo consideration. In support of his above contention, he has referred to the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s MIL India Ltd.-2007 (210) ELT 188 (SC) and Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida v. Orient Craft Ltd. reported in 2011 (21) S.T.R. 302 (Tri.-Del.). 5. I find the short point involved in this appeal filed by the Revenue is whether the ld. Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same as that of exercised by Commissoner (Appeals) under the provision of Section 35A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. I find that in the decision of the Division Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida v. Orient Craft Ltd. (supra) after considering the provisions prescribed under Section 35A, it has been held that the embargo on the power of remand in Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
