Shri Onkar Lal Saini vs C.C.E.&S.T., Jaipur-I
- CitationAppeal No.ST/51416/2014-CU[DB]
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a service demand rests on classifying the appellant's activity under the category of construction of complex service, and the same issue has been decided in favour of the appellant by a coordinate Tribunal decision that the Departmental Representative accepts as covering the point, the Tribunal is bound to follow that decision; accordingly, the requirement of pre-deposit is waived and the appeal is allowed on the strength of the earlier ruling that construction of individual houses does not fall within construction of complex service.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
1. Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? No 2. Whether it would be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? Yes 3. Whether Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the order? Seen 4. Whether order is to be circulated to the Department Authorities? Yes
Application No.ST/STAY/51712/2014-CU[DB]
Appeal No.ST/51416/2014-CU[DB]
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.154(VC)ST/JPR-I/2013, dated 24.10.2013 passed by the C.C.E.&S.T., Jaipur-I]
Shri Onkar Lal Saini Appellant
Vs.
C.C.E.&S.T., Jaipur-I Respondent
Appearance
Shri Bipin Garg, Advocate - for the appellant
Shri BB Sharma, DR - for the respondent
CORAM: Honble Honble Justice G. Raghuram, President
Honble Mr. R.K. Singh, Member (Technical)
Final Order No.51758/2015, dated 11.05.2015
Per Mr. R.K. Singh:
Stay Application along with Appeal has been filed against Order-in-Appeal dated 24.10.2013 which upheld the service demand of Rs.20,57,459/- (along with interest and penalties) for the period 2005-06 to 2008-09 under Construction of Complex service on the ground that the appellant had constructed houses in a housing complex for Rajasthan Housing Board. It is contended by the appellant that it built individual houses and therefore did not fall under the category of Construction of Complex service as per the judgement of CESTAT in the case of Marco Marvel Projects Ltd. Vs. CST, Chennai [2008 (12) STR 603 (Tri.-Chennai)]. The ld. Departmental Representative acknowledged that the said judgement of CESTAT covers the issue.
2. As the issue is squarely covered in favour of the appellant by CESTAT judgment in the case of Marco Marvel Projects Ltd. (supra), we waive the requirement of pre-deposit and allow the appeal.
(Justice G. Raghuram)
President
(R.K. Singh)
Member (Technical)
SSK
-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