9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 1399X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rd Tariff Ruling while adjudicating the cases.' A plain reading of the question framed leaves no room for any doubt that Board s circular became the subject matter of the substantial question. The High Court gave its stamp of approval to the order of authority below and the appeal was dismissed. There exists no substantial question of law, which needs adjudication - Appeal dismissed. - Honourable Sri Justice Sujoy Paul And Honourable Sri Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao For the Petitioner : Dominic Fernandes senior standing counsel for CBIC For the Respondent : A V A Siva Kartikeya JUDGMENT: PER HON BLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL Sri Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC appears for the appellant and Sri Prakash Shah ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . of S.T.,Delhi. [Delhi, 2020 (41) G.S.T.L. 372 (Tri. - Del.)] viii) Bharati Realty Ltd. v. Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi II. [2022 (65) G.S.T.L. 234 (Tri. - Del.)] ix) Commr. of Central Tax C. Ex., Mumbai v. Axis Bank Ltd., [2019 (369) E.L.T. 583 (Bom.)] x) RMZ Infotech Pvt. Ltd. v. Commr. of Central Tax, Bengaluru East. [2022 (64) G.S.T.L. 599 (Tri. Bang.)] xi) Honda Motorcycle Scooter (I) Pvt. Ltd. v. Commr. of C. Ex., Delhi-III. [2016 (45) S.T.R. 397 (Tri. - Chan.)] xii) Galaxy Mercantiles Ltd. vs Commr. of Cus., Excise Service Tax. [2014 (33) S.T.R. 3 (All.)] xiii) Bharti Airtel Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-III. [2014 (35) S.T.R. 865 (Bom.)] xiv) Vodafone Mobile Services Limited v. Commissioner of S.T., Delhi. [201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... while adjudicating the cases. 9. In view of the discussion above, we are of the considered opinion that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the appellant by various decisions relied upon cited supra and by following ratios of the said decisions, we set aside the impugned order by allowing the appeal of the appellant with consequential relief, if any. 8. However, an appeal was preferred before the Karnataka High Court and the High Court framed the following substantial question of law:- Whether the finding recorded by the CESTAT that the respondent is eligible to take Cenvat credit on inputs/ inputs services used for construction of immovable property and utilize the same to discharge the service tax liability on output services name ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
