9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 76X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the matter for de novo consideration. In any event, we are not adjudicating the correctness of such a direction and this order is confined only to the challenge only in respect of that portion of the order of the Tribunal deleting the penalty. The issue was an interpretational one and the services were taxable only for a limited period. The assessee also remitted the service tax collected from the insurance company - the Tribunal is right in deleting the penalty as being unwarranted. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.2478 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 23-10-2018 - Mr.Justice T.S. Sivagnanam And Mrs.Justice V. Bhavani Subbaroyan For Appellant : Mr.K.S.Ramaswamy JUDGMENT T.S.SIVAGNA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... part and set aside the penalty, which has been levied. 4. Mr.K.S.Ramaswamy, learned Standing Counsel for the appellant has strenuously contended that when the Tribunal remanded the entire issue to the Adjudicating Authority for de novo consideration, it was not justified in setting aside the penalty and more so when the Tribunal had relied upon the decision of this Court rendered by one of us while sitting singly (TSSJ) in the case of M/s.Arvinth Hospitals Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise [(2017) 48 STR 337]. He has further submitted that the matter should have been remanded in its entirety leaving it open the Adjudicating Authority to consider, in the de novo adjudication, the issue as to whether penalty is leviable or not. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ;health services' for levy of service tax. 7. In the case of M/s.Arvinth Hospitals, the writ petition was filed challenging the Order-in-Original confirming the demand of service tax by classifying the nature of services rendered by the petitioner therein under 'Health Checkup and Treatment Services' as defined under Section 65(105) (zzzzo) of the Finance Act, 1994. The Revenue objected to entertaining the writ petition on the ground that there had been an effective alternate remedy of appeal before the Commissioner of Appeals under the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994. However, this Court was inclined to entertain the writ petition in the light of the pure question of law, which was raised by the petitioner - hospital. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed any appeal as against the direction issued by the Tribunal remanding the matter for de novo consideration. In any event, we are not adjudicating the correctness of such a direction and this order is confined only to the challenge only in respect of that portion of the order of the Tribunal deleting the penalty. 9. As noticed above, the issue was an interpretational one and the services were taxable only for a limited period. The assessee also remitted the service tax collected from the insurance company. Thus, we find that the Tribunal is right in deleting the penalty as being unwarranted. In the light of the factual situation, we are convinced that no question of law, much less, substantial question of law arises for consideration ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
