9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 319X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctification of mistake is filed by another counsel Shri S. Murugappan, who has not appeared at the time of hearing of the appeal. Therefore, there is no basis to contend that there was no concession on the part of the counsel for the appellant, that the taxability of the services was not disputed. In the case of Anshita Chawla and Ramesh Chawla [2015 (8) TMI 1366 - CESTAT NEW DELHI], it was noted by the Tribunal that when no objection was raised by the appellant's counsel with regard to the recordings made at the time of disposing the case finally, the contention raised by the appellant for rectification of mistake thereafter cannot be entertained. There is no error apparent on the face of record, which requires rectification - ROM ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts in the case of Anshita Chawla and Ramesh Chawla Vs Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi reported in 2016 (46) S.T.R. 634 (Tri. -Del.) as well as in the case of Cadchem Laboratories Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh reported in 2015 (317) E.L.T 388 (Tri. -Del.) 4. Heard both sides and perused the records. 5. At the outset, it has to be stated that in the impugned order, the Tribunal has noted that there is no dispute that Catering Services provided by the appellant, was taxable. It is also seen that the order was dictated and pronounced in open court on the same date of hearing of the appeal. Thus, there is a categorical recording by the Tribunal that the appellant does not dispute the taxability of the services. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fication of mistake is filed by another counsel Shri S. Murugappan, who has not appeared at the time of hearing of the appeal. Therefore, there is no basis to contend that there was no concession on the part of the counsel for the appellant, that the taxability of the services was not disputed. Though, from the impugned order, the Tribunal has not used the words that the appellant concedes that the services are taxable , it is categorical that it is recorded that there is no dispute that the services are taxable. Further, it is seen that the appellant had approached the Hon'ble High Court by filing an appeal and thereafter, has filed this application for rectification of mistake. In the case of Anshita Chawla and Ramesh Chawla (supra) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
