TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1128X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nance Act and otherwise, the Tribunal has already allowed the appeal of the assessee but the assessee has an apprehension that the final findings may not be misinterpreted by the department and in future may not raise the demand - the apprehension is unfounded but still it is clarified that the said final conclusion is only with regard to section 84(4) of the Finance Act - ROM Application disposed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its Final order dated 10.10.2017 answered the issue in favour of the applicant-assessee and held that the applicant-assessee is entitled to the CENVAT credit of service tax paid on the services in question and was pleased to set aside the impugned Order-in-Appeal. Further, the applicant being aggrieved by the Order-in-Original No.9/2011-ST (Commr.) dated 2.2.2011 passed by the Commissioner, filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the second appeal is totally incorrect. However, the Tribunal in conclusion of the said in para 6.1 has upheld the impugned order which is contrary to Section 84(4). 3. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the Tribunal in para 6.1 of the Final Order has categorically held that the revision power under Section 84(1) of the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that in the conclusion, the Tribunal in the Final Order dated 10.10.2017 has held that the exercise of power of the revisionary authority is incorrect as on date of passing the Order-in-Revision when the appeal was pending before the Tribunal and not before the appellate authority. The final finding that the Order-in-Rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
