2019 (9) TMI 330 - HC - Service Tax

Permission for withdrawal of appeal - monetary amount involved in the appeal - activity of providing erection, commissioning and installation services/work contract services - HELD THAT - At the time of hearing, learned counsel for the appellant admits that in view of instructions dated 22.8.2019 issued by Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (Judicial Cell) the instant appeal would not be maintainable before this Court, as demand amount i.e. 11, 20, 077/- for the period from 2009-10 to 2012-13 and ₹ 59, 80, 109 alongwith applicable interest and penalty for the period 2013-14 is to be recovered, which is below the monetary limit of ₹ 1 Crore. Appeal dismissed as withdrawn.

Summary

Issues:
1. Demand for service tax without registration and payment
2. Appeal against service tax demand confirmation
3. Legality of CESTAT's final order
4. Stay on CESTAT's order
5. Restoration of the Order-in-Original
6. Applicability of Ministry of Finance's instructions on appeal maintainability

The respondent, a proprietary concern, provided erection, commissioning, and installation services to electricity distribution companies without service tax registration or payment during 2009-10 to 2012-13. Show cause notices were issued, and a demand of &8377;11,20,077/- for the earlier period and &8377;59,80,109 for 2013-14 was confirmed by the adjudicating authority. The respondent appealed to CESTAT, which allowed the appeal, leading to the present appeal before the High Court.

The substantial questions of law raised in the appeal were the fairness, legality, and correctness of CESTAT's final order dated 22.3.2018. Additionally, requests were made to stay the operation of the order, restore the Order-in-Original passed by the Commissioner, and seek any other relief deemed fit by the High Court.

During the hearing, the appellant's counsel acknowledged that the appeal might not be maintainable due to instructions issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, setting a monetary limit for recovery below &8377;1 Crore. Consequently, the appellant sought withdrawal of the appeal, although the legal questions raised remained open for future consideration.

The High Court, in light of the Ministry of Finance's instructions, dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting liberty for the questions of law to be addressed in the future.