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

2016 (10) TMI 235 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT

2016 (10) TMI 235 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT - 2017 (47) S.T.R. 3 (P & H) - Restoration of appeal of the PSU - demand of service tax - service tax was deposited in the consolidated fund of India under the Head 0044? - Held that:- the appellant is being deprived of hearing of its appeal on merits only for the reason that initially the Tribunal, vide order dated 30.10.2006, had referred the matter to the Committee on Disputes in terms of the order passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Oil and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eal. In these circumstances, the appellant cannot be left without any remedy. The order passed by the Tribunal dated 25.10.2012 declining to restore the appeal is set aside. The matter is remitted back for re-consideration thereof on merits. - Service Tax Appeal No. 9 of 2013 (O&M) - Dated:- 23-9-2016 - Rajesh Bindal And Darshan Singh, JJ. Mr. Anil Rathee, Advocate for the appellant Mr. Tajender K. Joshi, Advocate for the respondents ORDER Rajesh Bindal J. 1. The assessee is in appeal against th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

001) 3 SCC 404 and hear the appeal on merit ? (ii) Whether the order dated 2.11.2006 passed by Committee on Disputes (COD) amounts to denial of promotion (sick permission) to file appeal ? (iii) Whether after passing of the judgment by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Electronics Corporation of India Limited v. Union of India and others (supra), order dated 2.11.2006 automatically extinguished ? (iv) Whether instructions dated 24.3.2011 issued by Government of India after passing of the judgment by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ositing of service tax in the consolidated fund of India directly amounts to irregularity ? (viii) Whether the Central Excise has the authority to demand Service Tax afresh with penalty under Section 76 of the Act when the amount has already been accounted for in the Consolidated Fund of India ? (ix) Whether manifest injustice has been done to the appellant ? 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that vide Order-in- Original dated 8.2.2006, passed by the Commissioner, Central Customs Ex .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

2006, the Tribunal noticing the order passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Oil and Natural Gas Commission v. Collector of Central Excise, 1992 (61) ELT 3 (SC), opined that as requisite permission from the Committee on Disputes had not been obtained, the parties were relegated to the Committee on Disputes with liberty to the appellant to get the appeal restored after clearance from the Committee on Disputes. The application filed by the appellant for restoration of the appeal after the deci .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tion Bench judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Electronics Corporation of India Limited v. Union of India and others, (2001) 3 SCC 404, where it was opined that Committee on Disputes had out-lived its utility, the order passed in Oil and Natural Gas Commission's case (supra) was re-called. The appellant preferred fresh application before the Tribunal for restoration of the appeal, which was dismissed vide order dated 25.10.2012 for the reason that earlier similar application had bee .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ase in which the amount of tax had already been paid. The only dispute is that the same was deposited in a wrong account. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents, while referring to the circular dated 24.3.2011 issued by the Central Board of Excise & Customs, submitted that once the matter had been referred to the Committee on Disputes and that Committee having not granted permission, the application for restoration of the appeal was not maintainable. In the case in hand, 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

Supreme Court in Oil and Natural Gas Commission's case (supra). It is not in dispute that the Committee on Disputes thereafter directed the parties to sit across the table and resolve the dispute vide order dated 2.11.2006, but the dispute could not be resolved. The application filed by the appellant before the Tribunal for restoration of the appeal was dismissed on 12.3.2008. It was the stage, when the Committee on Disputes had passed the order directing the parties to sit across the table .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sort to such mechanism. Thereafter, the appellant preferred application to the Tribunal for restoration of the appeal. The same was dismissed. In our opinion, the order passed by the Tribunal cannot be sustained. The appellant cannot be deprived of its right to pursue the legal remedy as per the provisions of law applicable. The view expressed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Oil and Natural Gas Commission's case (supra) was not to curtail the right of the parties, but was to shorten the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

revising the guidelines on the issue was referred to. The net effect thereof was summed up in para No. 22 of the judgment, which is extracted below: 22. The net effect of the above can be summarized as under: (i) The Permanent Machinery of Arbitration was put in place as early as in March, 1989, even before ONGC II was decided on 11th October, 1991. (ii) The Permanent Machinery of Arbitration was outside the statutory provision then regulating arbitrations in this country namely Arbitration Act .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

C cases did not prevent filing of a suit or proceedings by one PSE/PSU against another or by one Government department against another. The only restriction was that even when such suit or proceedings was instituted the same shall not be proceeded with till such time the Committee on Disputes granted permission to the party approaching the Court. (v) The time limit fixed for obtaining such permission was also only directory and did not render the suit and/ or proceedings illegal if permission wa .....

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