Ashoka Infraways Pvt. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs

Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal16 April 2015

CitationAppeal No. ST/347/10

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The service tax demand on the management, maintenance and repair of roads, for the period 01.04.2008 to 30.11.2008, cannot be sustained where that period is covered by the retrospective amendment made by Notification No. 24/09-ST dated 27.07.2009, and where the same assessee's demands for the same issue were already set aside by this Tribunal in an earlier final order.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI

COURT No. I

Appeal No. ST/347/10

(Arising out of Order-in-Original No. 09/ST/2010 dated 28.04.2010 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Nasik)

For approval and signature:

Honble Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) Honble Mr. P.S. Pruthi, Member (Technical)

================================================

1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see : No the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the : No CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?

3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : Seen of the Order?

4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental : Yes authorities?

Ashoka Infraways Pvt. Ltd. Appellant Vs.

Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai Respondent

Appearance:

Shri Vinay Jain, Advocate for appellant Shri B.S. Meena, Addl. Commissioner (AR) for respondent

CORAM:

Honble Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) Honble Mr. P.S. Pruthi, Member (Technical)

Date of Hearing: 16.04.2015 Date of Decision: 16.04.2015

ORDER NO

Per: M.V. Ravindran

This appeal is directed against Order-in-Original No. 09/ST/2010 dated 28.04.2010.

2. When the matter was called out, both the side agreed that the issue involved in this case is regarding the service tax liability on the management, maintenance and repair of roads. It is also the submission that the issue is now covered by retrospect amendment by Notification No.24/09-ST dated 27.7.2009.

3. Learned Counsel brings to our notice that in respect of the very same assessee, this Bench in Appeal No. ST/248 & 249/09, vide final order No.A/727-728/12/CSTB/C-I dated 03.10.2012, has set aside the demands confirmed against the appellant. The period involved in this appeal is 01.04.2008 to 30.11.2008 and is covered by the retrospect amendment No.24/09-ST.

4. In view of the foregoing, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal.

(Dictated in Court)

(P.S. Pruthi) Member (Technical) (M.V. Ravindran) Member (Judicial)

nsk ??

1 2

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free