9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 609X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... toms, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Eastern Zonal Bench, Kolkata, in SP No. 16 of 2011 and Service Tax Appeal No. 13 of 2011, whereby, the appeal has been dismissed by the Tribunal for the want of clearance from Committee on Disputes (CoD), and the application (SP No. 16 of 2011) stood disposed of with it. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant M/s Engineering Projects (India) Ltd., Harishova, Laban, Shillong is an organization engaged in the field of construction, engineering and consultancy services. There is no dispute that the appellant is a Government of India undertaking incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. The appellant was served with a show cause notice date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made the following observations in para 9 : "9. The idea behind setting up of this Committee, initially, called a "High-Powered Committee" (HPC), later on called as "Committee of Secretaries" (CoS) and finally termed as "Committee on Disputes" (CoD) was to ensure that resources of the State are not frittered away in inter se litigations between entitles of the State, which could be best resolved, by an empowered CoD. The machinery contemplated was only to ensure that no litigation comes to Court without the parties having had an opportunity of conciliation before an in-house committee. (see : para 3 of the order dated 7.1.1994 (supra) Whilst the principle and the object behind t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 20.7.2007.' From the above observations and directions of the Apex Court, it is clear that the directions issued by the Apex Court earlier in the cases of ONGC Ltd. (supra) and ONGC Ltd. (supra) stood recalled. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant drew attention of this Court to the case of Steel Authority of India Ltd. v. CCE 2014 (302) ELT 348 (Cal), and Steel Authority of India v. CESTAT 2013 (293) ELT 510 (Cal) and argued that the Tribunal has erred in law in dismissing the appeal of the present appellant merely for the want of clearance from the CoD, particularly, when the directions in the ONGC's cases (supra) already stood repealed. 7. In reply to this, Mrs T Yangi, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
