9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 480X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther we should only interfere with that part of the Tribunal's order where it has imposed conditions of deposit. Interest of justice would be served if the appellant deposits a sum equivalent to 25% of the confirmed demand and if that deposit is made within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the Tribunal shall hear the appeal on merits and according to law. - Stay order modified - Decided partly in favor of assessee. - Central Excise Appeal No.149 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 2-2-2015 - S.C. Dharmadhikari N.W. Sambre, JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. A. Hidayatullah, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. M. Joshi and Ms. S. Kher, i/b. M/s. India Law Alliance For the Respondent : Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly a/w. Mr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... period under dispute was one prior to the amendment. Whether that amendment could have any impact on the prior period or not was thus an issue and which requires an answer. The Tribunal in paras 5.1 and 5.4 has rendered conclusive findings. The Tribunal has finally decided the issue as to whether prior to 1st April, 2011 trading was an exempted service. The Tribunal relied upon an order passed by it in the case of Mercedes Benz Pvt. Ltd. (reported in 2014 TIOL 476 CESTAT MUM) which has been stated to be on the same issue. If trading was not an exempt service prior to 1st April, 2011 and the amended provision will not have a retrospective effect, the Tribunal, then, commented as to how the demand fell within the four corners of law. 4. Mr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny interference in our further appellate jurisdiction. 7. With the assistance of the Counsel appearing for the parties we have perused the paper book and the annexures thereto including the impugned order. We find that the Appeal does raise a substantial question of law. The Appeal is therefore admitted on the following substantial questions of law : (i) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Tribunal is justified in calling upon the Appellants to pre deposit 50% of CENVAT Credit disallowed when the demand / denial of CENVAT Credit raised in the impugned notice issued by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai II Commissionerate, was totally without jurisdiction. (ii) Whether, in the facts and circu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e main issue but also on the peripheral issues of limitation the Tribunal has finally expressed itself. It is referring and extensively to its earlier orders and legal provisions and that would denote that the said findings are rendered because of some elaborate arguments being canvassed. In all such matters where detailed and elaborate arguments are canvassed it is not that the Tribunal must express itself on every single point or debatable issue. It must reserve all such for the final disposal of the Appeal. So long as any tentative and prima facie finding will suffice for disposal of such interim applications, the Tribunal must be careful and render only them and nothing more. We find that not just absence of a word prima facie but oth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
