Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2016 (10) TMI 282

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... WNS Global Services (P) Ltd. [2008 (1) TMI 94 - CESTAT, MUMBAI]. The decision in the WNS Global Services (P) Ltd. Case (supra) was upheld by the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay [2011 (2) TMI 503 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT]. The decision of the Tribunal in the case of Gujarat Ambuja Export Ltd. [2015 (11) TMI 239 - CESTAT MUMBAI] has not examined that the issue in contention in detail. Therefore, the contention of the Revenue cannot be accepted. We find that the issue is settled in favour of the appellants by the above decisions, especially by the decision in their own case. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court of Gujarat in the case of Mundra Port & Special Economic Zone Ltd. [2010 (5) TMI 483 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] has laid down the principle t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Minerals Ltd. [2012 (27) S.T.R. 18 (Tri-Kolkatta)] wherein it was held that the refund claim of service tax should be allowed, since on the date of filing claims the requirement of notification is satisfied. This means that the date of export is not relevant. It was also submitted that the Commissioner (A) had allowed the refund in a similar case earlier, but in the impugned order that decision was not followed on the ground that appeal has been filed before the Tribunal. Since the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Tribunal as cited by the ld. Counsel, I find that I am bound to follow the decision and accordingly it has to be held that appellant is eligible for the refund. 4. The Ld. Counsel submits that the present appe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ugh in the context of the Income-tax Act), that strictly speaking, res judicata does not apply to income-tax proceedings. Again, each assessment year being a unit, what is decided in one year may not apply in the following year but where a fundamental aspect permeating through the different assessment years has been found as a fact one way or the other and the parties have allowed that position to be sustained by not challenging the order, it would not be at all appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year. The principle enunciated by the aforesaid decision would be squarely applicable to the facts of the present case inasmuch as in the case of the respondent itself, Commissioner (Appeals) has held that it is entitle .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... een taxed either at the original stage or after being assessed to tax has been held to be not taxable in appeal proceedings, it would be open to revenue to re-agitate the same issue without either challenging the earlier order of the appellate authority or pointing out any difference in facts and circumstances of the case or position in law having undergone change. This salutary principle is not based on the principle of res judicata but is founded on principle of judicial comity and consistency in adopting approach to a particular issue in case of the same assessee, revenue being a party in the proceedings both relatable to the earlier period and the subsequent period. In such circumstances, revenue cannot be permitted to place reliance on .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... stoms Service Tax, Bhubaneswar [2012 (27) S.T.R. 18 (Tri.-Kolkata)]. The Tribunal has also examined the issue in WNS Global Services (P) Ltd. (supra). The decision in the WNS Global Services (P) Ltd. Case (supra) was upheld by the Hon ble High Court of Bombay [2011 (22) S.T.R. 609 (Bom.)]. 7. Per contra, the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Gujarat Ambuja Export Ltd. (supra) has not examined that the issue in contention in detail. Therefore, the contention of the Ld. Authorised Representative for Revenue cannot be accepted. We find that the issue is settled in favour of the appellants by the above decisions, especially by the decision in their own case. The Hon ble jurisdictional High Court of Gujarat in the case of Mundra Port .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates