9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 710X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 010-ST [DB] - MISC ORDER No. 50513/2017 - Dated:- 18-8-2017 - Hon ble Mr. S.K. Mohanty, Judicial Member And Hon ble Mr. V. Padmanabhan, Technical Member Shri J.K. Mittal, Advocate for the appellant Shri Govind Dixit, DR for the respondent ORDER Per V. Padmanabhan The present Miscellaneous application has been filed for rectification of certain mistakes apparent on record in the final order passed by the Tribunal vide Final order no. ST/A/53646-53647/2016 dated 19.09.2016. This order was passed jointly for two appeals i.e. ST/876/2010 and ST/52839/2014. 2. On behalf of the appellant Shri J.K. Mittal and Shri Rajveer Singh, Ld. Advocates appeared. Revenue was represented by Shri Govind Dixit, Ld. DR. 3. During th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (also included in written submissions para 7(i)) that once the show cause notice is issued for the longer period invoking the suppression clause, and it is found that the extended period of limitation is not invokable, the demand cannot be confirmed for the transactions within the normal time limit. In this connection, the appellant relied upon the Hon ble High Court of Kolkata s decision in the case of Infinity Parts Ltd. 2014 (36) STR 37 (Kolkata) and other case laws. No finding on this plea has been recorded in the final order. iii) The appellant had submitted (written note para 5) that they have not rendered any services which are covered in section 65(105)(zzzzq) read with section 65(25)(b) of the Finance Act in industrial construct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h sides and perused the record. 7. Through the present ROM, it has been argued that several material facts covered by the SCN were not considered by the Tribunal while passing the order. Further, several facts which were brought on record as well as pleas made by the appellants based on material facts on record and law were not considered. It has further been argued that the Tribunal has failed to give specific findings on a whole lot of pleas raised by the appellants during the course of argument of the appeal. Accordingly, it has been submitted that the final order dated 19.9.2006 is required to be recalled and a detailed order is required to be passed in its place. On the other hand Revenue has argued that the pleas made by the appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
