2015 (3) TMI 916

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... THY 1. The learned counsel submitted that the appeals are against a common order No. 10 & 11/2014 dated 15.04.2014 which considered the appeal filed against two orders-in-original which had been passed in respect of two show-cause notices issued to the appellants. The service tax demand was proposed in respect of Clearing and Forwarding Services and Business Auxiliary Service. As regards the Clea .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as regards imposition of penalty and invocation of extended period had been considered by the Tribunal in the case of Dineshchandra R. Agarwal Infracon Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Ahmedabad [2010 (18) S.T.R. 39 (Tri.-Ahmd.) and Essar Steel Ltd. Vs. CCE, Surat-I [2009 (13) S.T.R. 579 (Tri.-Ahmd.)] and in both the cases the Tribunal took the view that extended period could not have been invoked and consequen .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nalty becomes a question of application of facts and law and it would be appropriate if the learned original adjudicating authority reconsiders the issue in the light of decisions that may be cited and the law and the facts. Accordingly at this stage itself the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the original adjudicating authority for fresh consideration of this also. Needle .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X