9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 1004X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an appeal against the order of the CESTAT would lie in the Supreme Court under Section 35L of the Central Excise Act, 1944, even if there are other questions involved. The present appeal before this Court is not maintainable. - STA-23-2019 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 12-3-2020 - JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR And JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN Mr. Sunish Bindlish, Senior Standing Counsel, Indirect Taxation for the Appellant Mr. Amrinder Singh, Advocate for the Caveator-Respondent ORDER DR. S. MURALIDHAR , J. CM-20995-CII-2019 1. This is an application for condonation of delay of 5 days in re-filing the appeal. 2. For the reasons stated therein, the application is allowed. The delay of 5 days in re-filing the appeal is cond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Service' during the period from April, 2005 to March, 2010. 8. The said SCN came to be adjudicated by the Commissioner, Central Excise, Chandigarh-I, who passed an order dated 9th April, 2012 confirming the demand of ₹ 2,29,03,962/- in respect of services mentioned at Serial Nos. (i) (ii) of category A of Construction of Complex Services and Serial Nos. (i), (ii), (iii), (iv) and (v) of category B which was Commercial or Industrial Construction . A penalty of a sum of ₹ 2,05,05,000/- was also imposed besides demanding interest. The demand for the remaining services mentioned in the SCN was held not to be sustainable and was accordingly dropped. 9. The Respondent then filed an appeal in the CESTAT against the afo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court in view of the Section 35L of the Central Excise Tax Act, 1944 read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994. 13. The above submissions have been bolstered by the Respondent by their filing CM-1343-CII-2020, where apart from relying upon the decisions supporting its contention, it is pointed out that the Appellant itself has taken an inconsistent stand inasmuch as in matters involving similar issues of classification, it has chosen to file an appeal directly before the Supreme Court. One such instance pointed out is that of an appeal filed against the final order of CESTAT dated 24th September, 2018 in Vishranthi Homes Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Service Tax, which was directly preferred to the Supreme Court. A copy of the procee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
