9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 579X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e under a particular category of service found to be incorrect in a subsequent proceeding, cannot be sustained. The Commissioner (Appeals) proceeded to confirm the demand under works contract service for the period post 01.06.2007 even though the show cause notice had proposed the demand under the category of erection, commissioning or installation service - the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), therefore, deserves to be set aside on this ground alone. Extended period of Limitation - HELD THAT:- It would not be necessary to examine whether the extended period of limitation could have been invoked in the facts and circumstances of the case. The order dated 28.03.2018 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) is, accordingly, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iod prior to 01.06.2007 for the reason that the service could have been subjected service tax only under works contract service which became taxable w.e.f. 01.06.2007 and not under erection, commissioning or installation service. However, for the period post 01.06.2007, the Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the demand under works contract service, but gave the benefit of composition scheme to the appellant. 3. This appeal has been filed to assail the aforesaid order dated 28.03.2018 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). 4. Shri Alok Kumar Kothari, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, submitted that the demand for the period post 01.06.2007 also deserves to be set aside for the reason that the extended period of limitation could ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the grounds set forth in the memorandum of appeal or those taken by leave of the Tribunal under these rules. Provided that the Tribunal shall not rest its decision on any other grounds unless the party who may be affected thereby has had a sufficient opportunity of being heard on that ground. 8. It would be clear that though the appellant shall not, except by leave of the Tribunal, urge or be heard in support of any grounds not set forth in the memorandum of appeal, but the Tribunal, in deciding the appeal, shall not be confined to the grounds set forth in the memorandum of appeal or those taken by leave of the Tribunal. However, the Tribunal while deciding the appeal has to provide an opportunity to the parties of being heard on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upon the basis that there was a process of manufacture of coloured polystyrene from uncoloured polystyrene. Having come to a conclusion against the Revenue on these counts, the appropriate order for the Tribunal to have passed was to have set aside the demand and left it open to the Revenue to proceed against the appellants, as permissible under the law. The appellants would then have had the opportunity of meeting the precise case made out by the Revenue. 11. This is what was also observed by the Supreme Court in Reckitt Colman of India Ltd. vs. Collector of Central Excise [ 1996 (88) E.L.T. 641 (S.C.) ] in paragraph 3 of the judgment, which is reproduced below: 3. It will be remembered that the case of the Revenue, which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
