9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 329X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, as demand amount i. e. 94, 57, 161/- is to be recovered, which is below the monetary limit of ₹ 1 Crore. Appeal dismissed as withdrawn. - STA No. 6/2019 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 3-9-2019 - Mr Jaswant Singh And Mr Lalit Batra, JJ. For The Appellant : Mr. Sourabh Goel,Advocate ORDER Jaswant Singh, J, Since there is delay of 153 days in refiling the appeal, CM 6243-CII/2019 has been filed seeking condonation of said delay. Similarly to condone the delay of 2070 days in filing the appeal, CM 6244-CII/2019 has been filed. Both the applications seeking condonation of delay are accompanied by affidavit of Mr. V ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d on being pointed out by the Department, respondent had deposited the same on 19. 12. 2006. According to the appellant said amount of ₹ 94, 57, 161/- was liable to be recovered under Rule 14 of 2004 Rules read with Section 73(1) 73(2) of the Act by invoking the extended period of limitation of five years for omission and failure on their part in disclosing to the Central Excise Department the fact of providing both taxable and non-taxable services and willfully suppressing utilization of 100% service tax credit for payment of service tax payable instead of 20% in terms of Rule 6(3)(c) of 2004 Rules. The respondent was also considered liable to pay penalty under Rule 15 of 2004 Rules read with Section 78 of the Act. Further interest w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C)Whether the Ld. Tribunal committed a grave error in relying upon the order in case of Idea Cellular case reported as 2009(16)STR 712 (Tri-Del as in the said case the Ld. Tribunal had remanded back the case back to the adjudicating authority for de novo adjudication? At the time of hearing, learned counsel for the appellant admits that in view of instructions dated 22. 8. 2019 issued by Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (Judicial Cell) the instant appeal would not be maintainable before this Court, as demand amount i. e. 94, 57, 161/- is to be recovered, which is below the monetary limit of ₹ 1 Crore. In view of the said instructions dated 22 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
