9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (8) TMI 1461 - AT - Service TaxCombined hearing of two SCNs, one issued by DGCEI and another issued by the Commissionerate - It is the case of the Revenue in the ground of appeal that the adjudicating authority should not have passed this order - Held that - On perusal of the said order dated 28.12.2011 and considering the submissions, we find that this Appeal No.ST/470/2009 has become infructuous - appeal dismissed.
Issues:
Appeal against Order-in-Original No.01/2009-ST dated 28.01.2009; Challenge to combined hearings of show cause notices; Infructuous Appeal due to subsequent orders. Analysis: The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Hyderabad was filed by the revenue against Order-in-Original No.01/2009-ST dated 28.01.2009. Despite the absence of any representation from the Respondent and a request for adjournment, the Tribunal decided to proceed with the appeal due to the narrow scope of the issue and the appeal's vintage from 2009. The challenge by the Revenue was centered on the adjudicating authority's decision to conduct combined hearings for two show cause notices issued by DGCEI and the Commissionerate. The Revenue contended that this approach was improper, leading to the appeal before the Tribunal. During the proceedings, it was revealed that subsequent to the Order-in-Original No.01/2009 dated 28.01.2009, the adjudicating authority had confirmed the demands raised in another order, Order-in-Original No.10/2009-ST (Commr.) dated 31.12.2009. This subsequent adjudication order was challenged before the Tribunal in service tax Appeal No.1232/2010. The Tribunal, through Final Order No.927/2011 dated 28.12.2011, set aside the Order-in-Original No.10/2009-ST dated 31.12.2009, rendering the current Appeal No.ST/470/2009 infructuous. Upon reviewing the Tribunal's order dated 28.12.2011 and considering the submissions made, the Tribunal found that Appeal No.ST/470/2009 had lost its purpose and relevance due to subsequent developments. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal as it had become infructuous. The decision was made after a thorough examination of the case history and the impact of subsequent adjudication orders on the appeal before the Tribunal.
|
