9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 239X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed two applications namely, ST/ROM/40159/2019 and ST/ROM/40160/2019 in respect of Appeals ST/146/2011 & ST/268/2011 respectively seeking rectification of mistake in respect of Final Order Nos.40251-40254/2019. 2. On behalf of the appellant, Ld. Counsel Ms. K. Nancy appeared and submitted that there are apparent errors on the face of record which needs to be rectified. She made oral and written submissions as under: i) The assessee had filed two appeals viz. ST/146/2011 and ST/268/2011 against the impugned Order-in-Original No.59 & 60/2010 dated 29.11.2010 passed by the adjudicating authority viz. Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai (respondent). ii) In terms of the order passed, the authority dropped major portion of the demand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... et aside the impugned order to the extent as below:- (a) Revenue's appeals No. ST/142-143/2011 are treated as allowed by way of remand. (b) Assessee's appeals No. ST/146 & 268/2011 are partly allowed in respect of reimbursable expenses and partly remanded in respect of service tax on GTA services. vi) After considering the rival arguments advanced, in para-5 of the said Final Order, the Tribunal has rendered the following findings : "5. After going through the facts as also the ratio of the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment supra, we find that the above decision squarely applies to the facts of the present case and hence the demands cannot sustain. For these reasons, we set aside the demands in respect of reimbursable expenses and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nable to perceive any discussion on the contentions of the assessee as to providing service to SEZ or that appellant did or did not furnish any documents; nor that the appellant's contentions are correct or incorrect, we are therefore constrained to remand this issue back to the file of the adjudicating authority to pass a denovo adjudication order, after offering reasonable opportunity to the appellants and after considering all such supporting documents placed/to be placed by the assessee." viii) Thus effectively, as per the findings in para 5 to 7 of the Tribunal's Final Order dt. 07.02.2019, the department's plea for remitting the matter to the original authority for reconsideration of the issue relating to charging of service tax on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al. Hence there is no apparent error on the face of record. 4. Heard both sides and have gone through the facts of the case. 5.1 From the facts on record, we find that related assessee appeals ST/146 & 268/2011 had emanated out of the Order-in-Original No.59 & 60/2010 dt. 29.11.2010 against the adjudicating authority's confirmation of service tax demands of ₹ 10,44,079/- on CHA and GTA services, ₹ 98,238/- in respect of reimbursable expenses relating to EDI charges, Bank commission and Loading and Unloading charges and demand of ₹ 9,45,841/- on GTA services. Against the same orders-in-original, the Revenue had also filed Appeals ST/142 & 143/2011 against the dropping of demand by the adjudicating authority to the exten ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
