2014 (9) TMI 416 - HC - Service Tax

Jurisdiction of high court - service tax appeal - Held that - It is clear from the language of Section 35G that no appeal will lie to the High Court if the order passed by the Tribunal relates to among other things rate of duty or to valuation of taxable service. In such cases, appeal will lie under Section 35L before the Supreme Court. In the present case, the impugned order dated 12th March, 2012 passed by the Tribunal among other issues/question decides the question of rate of duty and valuation of taxable services. In view of the said position and as the respondent herein has already filed an appeal, which is pending before the Supreme Court, we think that the appeal filed by the Revenue before the High Court should not be entertained and cannot be entertained. - Appeal dismissed - Decided against the revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
2. Jurisdiction of High Court under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act.
3. Distinction between appeals to High Court and Supreme Court based on issues of rate of duty or valuation.

Condonation of Delay:
The judgment begins with an application for condonation of delay in filing an appeal due to a deficiency in court fees. The delay of ten days was caused by the time taken to obtain additional court fees. The respondent raised no objection to condoning the delay, and the application was allowed.

Jurisdiction of High Court under Section 35G:
The impugned order by the Customs, Excise, Service Tax Appellate Tribunal was challenged before the Supreme Court by the respondent. The Revenue, i.e., Service Tax authorities, also contested the order by filing an appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act read with Section 83 of the Finance Act. The judgment clarifies that appeals on issues related to rate of duty or valuation are maintainable before the Supreme Court under Section 35L, while appeals on other aspects are to be filed before the High Court under Section 35G.

Distinction between Appeals to High Court and Supreme Court:
The judgment emphasizes that no appeal lies to the High Court if the Tribunal's order pertains to the rate of duty or valuation of taxable services. In such cases, appeals should be made to the Supreme Court under Section 35L. As the impugned order in this case dealt with issues of rate of duty and valuation, the High Court held that the appeal filed by the Revenue cannot be entertained and should be pursued before the Supreme Court. This decision aligns with previous rulings by the Supreme Court and the High Court, emphasizing that the nature of the order appealed against determines the court's jurisdiction. Consequently, the appeal was directed to be returned to the appellant as not maintainable before the High Court, effectively disposing of the case.

This detailed analysis provides a comprehensive understanding of the judgment, covering the condonation of delay, the jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 35G, and the distinction between appeals to the High Court and the Supreme Court based on the issues of rate of duty or valuation.