9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (5) TMI 18X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty for fresh analyzes - S/102/2006 - 462/2006 - Dated:- 31-5-2006 - [Order] - After examining the records and hearing both sides, I am of the view that the appeal itself requires to be finally disposed of. Accordingly, after dispensing with pre-deposit, I proceed to deal with the appeal. 2. The appellants are clearing and forwarding agents. They rendered C F agent's service to a cli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , which confirmed the demand of tax amounting to Rs. 5,22470/-, against the assessee. Appeal was preferred to the Commissioner (Appeals), who remanded the case to the lower authority for de novo adjudication. The present appeal is against this remand order. 3. After examining the records and considering the submissions of learned Counsel and the learned SDR, I find that the entire case was reman ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed, which resulted in short payment/non payment Needless to say, the lower authority shall decide the matter by issuing a speaking order, after observing the principles of natural justice" With reference to the above order, the learned Counsel has raised a contention that, as the original authority was directed to re-quantity the service tax liability in the light of the observations given in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tify the service tax liability. As full liberty was given to the original authority for fresh analysis of the issue, that authority should do its job, untrammeled by the observations of the Commissioner (Appeals). The grievance raised in this regard seems to be genuine. As regards penalty, the Commissioner (Appeals) rightly left it to be quantified by the lower authority. The Commissioner (Appeals ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
