9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 386X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the definition of out-door catering service, on which alone, the assessment was made under the Finance Act, 1994. The Assessing Officer could not have imposed tax, especially on the finding rendered by the First Appellate Authority which is accepted by the Department - the demand made be not proceeded with on the certain condition being complied - appeal disposed off. - C. E. Appeal. No. 14 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 3-9-2018 - MR K. VINOD CHANDRAN AND MR ASHOK MENON, JJ. For The Appellant : ADV. SRI. JOHN JOSEPH VETTIKAD For The Respondent : SRI. SREELAL N WARRIER, SC JUDGMENT Vinod Chandran, J The Central Excise appeal has been filed raising several questions of law. The facts to be noticed are that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in out-door catering services, which finding of the First Appellate Authority has been accepted by the Department? 4. The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant relied on CIT Madrass v. V. Mr.P Firm Muar [AIR (1965) SCC 1216] and Mathuram Agrawal v. State of Madhya Pradesh[(1999)8 SCC 667] . 5. The learned Sanding Counsel appearing for the Revenue would submit that Mathuram Agrawal (supra) would not be applicable,since there the question was with respect to the challenge against the charging section which was held to be ultra vires. The learned Standing Counsel would rely on (2008) 3 SCC 70 (M/s. Singh Enterprises v. Commissioner of Central Excise) and Amchong Tea Estate [(2010) 15 SCC 131] 6. Singh Enterprises was relied on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... we already noticed, there is no taxable transaction insofar as the transaction of the appellant having been held to fall outside the definition of out-door catering service, on which alone, the assessment was made under the Finance Act, 1994. 8. We are of the opinion that the Assessing Officer could not have imposed tax, especially on the finding rendered by the First Appellate Authority which is accepted by the Department. We direct that the demand made be not proceeded with on the following condition being complied. We notice that there was considerable delay in having filed the appeal, and in such circumstances we direct the appellant to pay an amount of ₹ 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) towards the Chief Minister ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
