TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1448X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the appellant in context with the refund application were rejected by the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), especially in view of admittance of appeal by the Hon’ble Supreme Court - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - Service Tax Appeal No. ST/51722-51727/2017-ST [SM] - Final Order No. 50718-50723/2018 - Dated:- 21-2-2018 - Hon'ble Mr. S.K. Mohanty, Member ( Judicial ) Mr. K. Poddar, DR for the Appellant Mr. Satish Mohinders Mr. Narender Kumar, (Advocates) of the Respondent ORDER Per S. K. Mohanty In these appeals, Revenue has assailed the impugned order on the ground that placing reliance on the judgment dated 03.06.2016 of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in W.P.(C) No. 2235/2011 and W.P. (C) No. 2971/201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpugned order dated 05.06.2017, has upheld the original order and rejected the appeals filed by the appellants. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) has held that the ratio of the judgment dated 03.06.2016 cannot be applicable in-personnem inasmuch as the same has been delivered in absolute on all unequivocal terms. The appeals were rejected on the ground that the Department has not accepted such decision of the Hon ble Delhi High Court and has filed appeal before the Hon ble Supreme Court. Thus, he has held that unless the issue is resolved by the Hon ble Apex Court, the appellants should not succeed for the refund claim. The relevant findings recorded in the impugned order are extracted herein below:- A careful perusal of the above ju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the basic temporal condition which is of paramount importance here, is that the verdict so delivered must attain finality in order to make it applicable in general. The impugned order very clearly states that the department has challenged the above order of Hon ble High Court before the Hon ble Supreme Court wherein it has been asserted that the levy is not ultravires to the Constitution of India. This means that the question of law as decided vide above judgment of the Hon ble High Court of Delhi has not been accepted by the department and therefore, the said judgment cannot be made applicable even in the case of the petitioners themselves, leave aside the appellants, till the question of law is settled by the Hon ble Apex Court. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
