9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 366X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rule 4A of Service Tax Rule, 1994 - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - Appeal No. E/52809/2015-EX [DB] - Final Order No. 70280/2018 - Dated:- 24-1-2018 - Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri Rajeev Ranjan (Joint Commr.) AR for Appellant Shri Rajesh Chhibber (Advocate) for Respondent ORDER Per: Anil Choudhary This is the second round of litigation, so far part of the period is involved. Earlier the issue travelled before this Tribunal for the period October, 2006 to December, 2010 wherein this Tribunal has remanded the issue back to the Original Authority and observed as follows:- 7. The only point of dispute in this case is as to whether the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns all the information, which is required to be mentioned in an invoice in terms of Rule 4A (1) of Service Tax Rules, 1994, the document has to be treated as invoice issued under Rule 4A (1) of Service Tax Rules, irrespective of its title and service tax credit has to be allowed on the basis of such document. However, in this case, the Commissioner has not examined this aspect and has simply disallowed the credit on the basis that the document on the basis which the Cenvat credit has been availed were titled debit notes and not invoices. The impugned order, therefore, is not sustainable and the same has to be set aside and the matter has to be remanded for denovo adjudication after examining as to whether the debit notes contained all the i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... service definition under Cenvat Credit Rule, 2004, whereas this Tribunal had remanded the case only to the extent of examining issue as whether the debit notes contain all information which is required to be mentioned in the invoice in terms of Service Tax Rules, 1994. 4. Heard the parties. 5. We find that Revenue is trying to raise an issue which is already settled by the earlier order of this Tribunal in the earlier round of litigation, as quoted hereinabove. Thus under the doctrine of merger, Revenue cannot raise concluded issue in the remanded matter by Tribunal wherein directions were specific that the Adjudicating Authority is required only to examine whether debit notes in question contain all the particulars as required under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
