2012 (11) TMI 169

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... was called, the Ld. AR submits that on the last occasion when the matter was considered on 20th July, 2012, 3 appeals viz. ST/177-179/2011 were listed. However, while passing the order in the preamble of the order, only 2 appeals viz. ST/177-178/2011 were mentioned. He also submits that the OIA Nos. have been shown as 382 to 384 which is correct and in paragraph no.3 of the order, the order starts .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... able to be paid and therefore the original adjudicating authority passed an order holding that the activity of the respondent involved construction of more than 12 units in the residential complex and therefore they were liable to pay service tax and hence amount paid by them was correctly paid and there was no need for sanction of refund. On an appeal filed by the respondents, in the impugned ord .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he impugned orders have not dealt with. 6. In view of the above discussion, the impugned order is set aside and matter is remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh decision after taking note of the grounds of appeal by revenue in appeals filed before the Tribunal and after giving reasonable opportunity to the respondents to present their case if they desire to do so. (Operative portion of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X