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

2015 (11) TMI 475 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2015 (11) TMI 475 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - 2016 (41) S.T.R. 535 (Tri. - Del.) - Rectification of mistake - Restoration of appeal - Availment of CENVAT Credit - Tour service - Maintenance of separate accounts - Tribunal consider the issue of penalty only and did not consider the eligibility of Cenvat Credit - appellants utilized Cenvat Credit on those input services which were used for providing non-taxable output service - Held that:- An error cannot be said to be apparent if it is not self evident. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

by a long drawn process of reasoning on points where there may conceivably be two opinions can hardly be said to be an error apparent on the face of the record. - applications before me are an ROA application and a Misc. application to convert the ROA into an ROM by causing amendments in the ROA. The learned Counsel for appellant has not put forward any explanation as to why he has filed an ROA - While an application for restoration is to be filed under Rule of 20 of the CESTAT, (Procedure) Rule .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

T/MISC./51552/2015 & ST/ROA/50347/2015, APPEAL NO. ST/59262/2013 - Misc. Order Nos. M/52806-52807/2015-SM(BR) - Dated:- 28-7-2015 - MS. SULEKHA BEEVI C.S., J For The Appellant : R. Krishnan, Adv. For The Respondent : G.R. Singh, DR. ORDER 1. The above Misc. Application No. ST/Misc/51552/2015 is filed by the appellants seeking amendment of the ROA application No. ST/ROA/50347/2015. 2. The ROA application is in fact not an application for restoration of the appeal. On perusal it is an application .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ibunal Final Order No. A/54472/2014-SM/BR/dated 13.10.2014. The prayer sought in the ROA is to recall the Final Order, rehear on merits and pass appropriate order correcting the apparent error on the face of record. Thus per se the application is ROM. But the same is seen filed as ROA. When the ROA application came up for hearing on 18.6.2015 these defects were pointed out. The learned Counsel for appellant sought adjournment of the matter. The case was adjourned to 27.7.2015 when further adjour .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he face of record and that the impugned Final Order has to be recalled and reheard. It is his submission that the Final Order did not deal with the merits of the case. That this Tribunal consider the issue of penalty only and did not consider the eligibility of Cenvat Credit. That though plea was raised whether there is export of service, it was not considered at all and that therefore there is error apparent on the face of record. 4. The learned DR opposed both the Misc. application and ROA app .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

have the Final Order recalled and the appeal reheard, which is an abuse of the proceedings. 5. I have carefully considered the rival submissions. The issue in the appeal is regarding availment of Cenvat Credit. The appellants, M/s Indian Visit (P.) Ltd., were providing tour services for both foreign and local tourists. The payments from foreign tourists were received in convertible foreign exchange. According to appellants these being treated as export of services are not taxable services where .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tricted to 20% as per Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules. This was sustained by the Commissioner (Appeals). By the impugned order the Tribunal has upheld the same. 6. The foremost submission of the Counsel appearing on behalf of appellants is that there is an error apparent on the face of record as the Tribunal failed to consider the issue whether appellants were eligible to avail Cenvat Credit and also whether there was export of services. 7. The learned Counsel for the appellant relied upon the sev .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

said to be an error apparent on the face of the record and can be corrected while exercising certiorari jurisdiction. An error cannot be said to be apparent on the face of the record if one has to travel beyond the record to see whether the judgment is correct or not. An error apparent on the face of the record means an error which strikes on mere looking and does not need long-drawn-out process of reasoning on points where there may conceivably be two opinions. Such error should not require an .....

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