TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 934X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Mr. C.J. Mathew, Member (Technical) Shri Rohan Shah, Advocate, Shri J.H. Motwani, Advocate and Ms. Divya Jaswant, Advocate for appellant Shri Roopam Kapoor, Commr (AR), for respondent Per: M.V. Ravindran These two sets of ROM applications are filed by assessee M/s Jet Airways Ltd., and Revenue against our final order No. A/88840 - 88844/16/STB dated 29.07.2016. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. Applicn No. ST/ROM/93238 to 93242, 93392 to 93396/16 3. The Rectification of Mistake as sought by M/s. Jet Airways (India) Ltd. (Jet Airways in short) in their applications is that in final order dated 29.07.2016, in paragraph No. 10 on revenue neutrality, Bench has held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch it was brought to the notice of the Tribunal that the issue of revenue neutrality was not taken up before adjudicating authority and was taken up before the Tribunal; that the issue of revenue neutrality is a question of fact and the matter has to be remanded back to decide the revenue neutrality situation, the service tax return filed by Jet Airways submitted during the course of personal hearing to indicate that the entire services rendered by appellant for transportation of passengers by air was not fully taxable service during the relevant period; that in paragraph 10.3 of the order, the Tribunal has observed that there is linkage of output service and input service and it is in contradiction to the findings of the Tribunal and it wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be denied on the basis of the Company did not discharge the tax before hand; post decision of Star Industries (supra) the Apex Court in the case of SRF Ltd. - 2007 (220) ELT 201 (Tri. - Chennai) and in the case of Angadpal Indl. P. Ltd. - 2015 (325) ELT 228 (S.C.) have reiterated that if the entire exercise is of revenue neutral, the demands can be set aside; it was also submitted that the payments made by the Jet Airways to CRS Companies were in respect of tickets issued as was argued by the Company there would not be any service tax liability and the reliance placed by the Bench on the judgement of the British Airways is correct. 7. We have considered the submissions made by both sides. 8. Basically, Revenue wants the bench to r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re unacceptable to us as the error which is sought to be rectified is not an error apparent on the face of the records. The arguments put forth by the learned Commissioner needs elaborate discussion which is not the mandate of the provisions of Section 35C of the Central Excise Act, 1944, for rectification of mistake in the orders. It is to be noted that the Bench has categorically recorded the reasoning adopted for holding in favour of Jet Airways on revenue neutrality, in detail. If revenue is aggrieved by such an order, their grievance needs to be addressed at the higher judicial fora and not by seeking recall of our order in the garb of application for rectification of mistake. 9. In view of the foregoing, we find no merits in the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
