Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Service Tax, Bangalore Versus M/s. Kyocera Wireless [I] Pvt. Ltd.

2016 (2) TMI 473 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

Validity and scope of Interim order while passing Final Order - whether Tribunal is empowered to pass non-speaking orders while disposing of statutory appeals and while discharging judicial functions - Refund of accumulated cenvat credit - Relevant date in case of export of services - Held that:- it is clear that the Tribunal in all its eagerness to decide the pending cases, in order to reduce the pendency of appeals, has adopted a technique in clubbing nearly 192 cases and passing an interim or .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Tribunal is strange and contrary to the settled principles of law. Passing Final Order, referring to the paragraphs in the Interim Order is not a speaking order. As such, the order passed by the Tribunal is not sustainable. - Matter remanded back. - CEA No.11/2015 - Dated:- 25-1-2016 - MR. N.K. PATIL AND MRS. S. SUJATHA, JJ. For The Appellant : Sri. C. Shashikantha, CGC For The Respondent : Sri. L.S. Karthikeyan, Advocate JUDGMENT This appeal is directed against the Judgment passed by the Centra .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

able, Cenvat credit should not be denied and refund should be granted? (c) Whether Tribunal is right in holding that the refund claimed is within limitation, while ignoring the terms of Notification No.5/2006 CE [NT] dated 14.03.2006 and Sec.11 [b] of the Central Excise Act, 1944? (d) Whether Tribunal is legally wrong while holding that the assessee is eligible for refund, if the refund claims are filed within one year from the date of receiving export proceeds in foreign currency? (e) Whether T .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e respondent is in the business of providing software engineering and support services including development of application software for accessories for commercial models, evaluation installment of software drivers, tests on to mobile handsets etc., and took credit on these services. Two refund claims were filed by the assessee for the period March 2007 and April 2007 to March 2008 and the amount involved was ₹ 4,87,439/- and ₹ 75,07,708/- respectively being the accumulated service c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

er of Service Tax rejecting refund claims holding that the claims have been barred by limitation etc. Being aggrieved by the said Orders in original, the respondent preferred appeals before the Appellate Commissioner which were rejected by the Appellate Authority. Being aggrieved, the respondent filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal by its Final Order No. of 29.09.2014 allowed the appeals and remanded the matter to the original adjudicating authority to decide the refund claim in lin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed on the issues involved in the batch of matters. This technique was adopted by the Tribunal to reduce the pendency of appeals. This clubbing of the cases and passing a common interim order was opposed by the learned counsels appearing for the parties. It was submitted before the tribunal that it would be appropriate to decide each case individually instead of passing common order on the common issues. After considering the said submissions, the Tribunal held that an order identifying common/le .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the Interim Order as far as output service and limitation are concerned. In terms of the Interim Order, the order impugned before the Tribunal is set aside and the matter is remanded to the original adjudicating Authority to decide the refund claim in line with the observations made in Interim Order which is unheard and unknown in the field of law. Accordingly, he seeks to set aside the Final Order passed by the Tribunal and to remand the matter back to the Tribunal to pass a speaking order in 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

, Vs. CST, Bangalore reported in [(2012) 27 STR 134 (Kar.)]. 5. It is further contended that the second issue regarding limitation is also considered at Paragraph 6.16 of the Interim Order. The Tribunal, after considering Judgments of several High Courts held, the claim made by the Assessee is within the normal period. In view of the said finding given by the Tribunal in the Interim Order, there was no necessity to reproduce the same in the Final Order. Common issues were involved in number of c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version