2016 (6) TMI 1331 - HC - Central Excise

Application for withdrawal of appeal - Circular No.I/10/10/2016 Legal, dated 21/3/2016 - Held that - While dismissing the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.2051 of 2011, as withdrawn, substantial questions of law raised are left open.

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of precedent set by Kerala High Court
2. Compliance with Notification No.10/2003 S.T
3. Application of precedent without discussing facts

Interpretation of Precedent:
The appeal raised the issue of whether the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in following the ratio of a decision by the Kerala High Court in a specific case. The appellant argued that the Kerala High Court's judgment was made based on the facts of that particular case and should not be considered a binding precedent. The Tribunal's decision was challenged on the grounds that it did not discuss the facts and applicability of the Kerala High Court's decision to the present case with distinguishable facts.

Compliance with Notification No.10/2003 S.T:
Another issue raised in the appeal was whether the Tribunal's order was legal and correct, despite the Taxable Information Management Services (TIMS) not fulfilling the conditions of Notification No.10/2003 S.T dated 20/6/2003. It was noted that TIMS collected fees from students in two parts, one sent to the University and another directly collected for conducting classes. The appellant contended that TIMS did not meet the conditions of the notification, raising questions about the legality of the Tribunal's decision.

Application of Precedent without Discussing Facts:
The third issue focused on whether the Tribunal erred in applying the ratio of the Kerala High Court's decision without discussing the facts and its relevance to the current case, which presented distinguishable facts. The argument was centered on the lack of detailed analysis by the Tribunal regarding the applicability of the precedent to the specific circumstances of the case at hand.

In the hearing, the appellant's counsel informed the court about the department's decision to withdraw the appeal based on instructions from Circular No.I/10/10/2016 Legal. Consequently, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal was dismissed as withdrawn, leaving the substantial questions of law raised in the appeal open without imposing any costs.