9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 391X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 26 - CESTAT, BANGALORE] without discussing the facts of the present case and no finding has been given whether the respondent is a service provider or not in order to give benefit of the judgment in Central Power Research Institute. - order setaside and remanded back for reconsideration by the Tribunal afresh - C.E.A. NO.3/2007 - - - Dated:- 9-1-2014 - K L Manjunath And Ravi Malimath, JJ. F ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ltancy Services as defined under Section 65(92) of the Act? (ii) Whether the CESTAT was right in relying upon his own Final Order, which related to a different category of service and also which has not yet attained finality in terms of the accepted legal norms? 3. Though respondent is served, is unrepresented. In the circumstances, we have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1.08.2003 @ 5% up to 13.05.2003 and 8% from 14.05.2003 onwards. The original authority passed an order on 31.05.2004 dropping the proceedings on the ground that the 1st respondent is not rendering service. Aggrieved by the same, the appeal came to be filed by the Department, which appeal came to be allowed against which, an appeal was filed before the Tribunal. The Tribunal relying upon the judgme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taside and requires to be reconsidered by the Tribunal afresh. Thus, the appeal is allowed. The order passed by the CESTAT in final order No.1348/2006 is hereby set-aside without answering the substantial question of law and the matter is remanded for fresh consideration in accordance with law. Since the subject matter of the appeal is old, we direct the Tribunal to dispose of the matter withi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
