New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (11) TMI 336 - CESTAT MUMBAI

2015 (11) TMI 336 - CESTAT MUMBAI - 2016 (42) S.T.R. 316 (Tri. - Mumbai) - Contesting the service tax liability after admitted the same before adjudicating authority - levy of penalty - Benefit of exemption and abatement as per Notification 9/2004-ST and 1/2006-ST - Duty demand u/s 11D - Held that:- miscellaneous application is devoid of merits and needs to be dismissed for more than one reason. Firstly, we find that the appeal has been filed by the appellant in November, 2010 and the miscellane .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ng penalties. Due to these reasons, we hold that the appellant cannot today agitate the issue on merits. - Assessee are not contesting the factual findings as to that they had collected the service tax liability from their clients and did not deposit the same to the government treasury. On this factual matrix, we find that the prayer made by the learned counsel as to invoking the provisions of Section 80 to set aside the penalties are unacceptable and not in consonance with the law. In the a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ate For the Respondent : Shri D. Nagvenkar, Addl. Commissioner (AR) ORDER Per: M.V. Ravindran: This appeal is directed against Order-in-Original No: PI/Commr./Service Tax/03/2010 dated 20/08/2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune I. 2. The appellant has also filed a miscellaneous application which is listed today. The said miscellaneous application is for raising additional grounds under Rule 10 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the ap .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

as w.e.f. 01/06/2007. It is his submission that all these grounds are being urged as a question of law before the Tribunal. 2.1. After considering the submissions made by the learned AR and on perusal of the records, we find that the said miscellaneous application is devoid of merits and needs to be dismissed for more than one reason. Firstly, we find that the appeal has been filed by the appellant in November, 2010 and the miscellaneous application is filed in April 2015, almost after a gap of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

we hold that the appellant cannot today agitate the issue on merits. In view of this we reject the application for raising additional grounds of appeal. 2.3. The learned counsel cited Atita Traders vs. Collector of Central Excise, Ahmedabad 1998 (101) ELT 321 and Voltas Limited vs. Collector of Customs, 1997 (91) ELT 261 (SC) for the proposition that point of law can be raised at the Tribunal level. We have perused the judgment cited by the learned counsel. We have no quarrel with the propositio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version