9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 386X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se circumstances, we are of the view that it is prudent and appropriate to remand the matter to the adjudicating authority to re-examine the issues afresh taking into consideration the admissibility of Notification No.45/2010-ST dated 20.7.2010 issued under Section 11C of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and Notification No.11/2010-ST dated 27.2.2010 to the appellant In these circumstances, we are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iginal No. PUN-SVTAX-000-COM-013-14-15 dated 31.3.2015 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-III, one by the Revenue and the other by the assessee, since involve common issues, are taken up together for disposal. 2. Briefly stated facts in both the appeals are that during the relevant period 2005-06 to 2009-10, the appellant was providing taxable services under the category of erection ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s contention that a miniscule amount of demand relates to rendering services to private parties. It is his contention that even though various issues were raised before the learned adjudicating authority disputing the demand, but they have not raised the issue of eligibility of retrospective exemption from payment of service tax in relation to transmission of electricity as allowed under Notificat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the appellant has not raised the issue of eligibility of Notification Nos.45/2010-ST dated 20.7.2010 and 11/2010-ST dated 27.2.2010, hence, it could not be considered. 5. We find the appellant-assessee now claims before this Tribunal that most of the services rendered by them during the relevant period 2005-06 to 2009-10 relate to transmission of electricity to MSEDCL, hence, covered by Notif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
