9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 852X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of the detailed submissions made by the Appellate Revenue before CESTAT. In paragraphs 5 and 5.1, only the conclusions have been recorded without recording any reasons. We are constrained to hold that the impugned judgment and order is perverse and hence, the same deserves to be set aside - appeal is restored to the file of CESTAT, West Zonal Bench at Mumbai - Central Excise Appeal No. 138 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he service tax paid by the subcontractor? 2. The challenge in this Appeal is to the judgment and order dated 12 August 2014 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short CESTAT ), West Zonal, Bench at Mumbai. The said Appeal was preferred by the AppellantRevenue for challenging the OrderinAppeal dated 23 October 2008 passed by the Commissioner Central Excise (Appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he rival contentions, I find that the Notification No. 1/2006ST is in confrontation with the charging section, Section 66 of the Finance Act, 1994 and accordingly I hold the same is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case so far as the condition relating to not taking of CENVAT Credit is concerned of the service tax paid by the subcontractor. Further, I notice that the finding of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hs 5 and 5.1, only the conclusions have been recorded without recording any reasons. 6. The learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent tried to justify the ultimate order passed by the CESTAT by submitting what is held in paragraphs 5 and 5.1 is in the context of what is recorded in the earlier paragraphs. 7. As stated earlier, the impugned judgment upto paragraph 4.5 contains the facts an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h at Mumbai on 26 September 2017 at 11.00 a.m. for fixing the schedule of hearing; (iv) Since the Appeal before CESTAT is of the year 2009, necessary priority be given by the said Tribunal to the disposal of this Appeal; (v) We make it clear that no adjudication made by us on the merits of the controversy; (vi) Appeal is partly allowed on the aforesaid terms; (v) All concerned to act u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
