Yahoo Software Development India Pvt ... vs Commissioner Of Service Tax ...
- CitationAppeal No. 237
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The impugned Order-in-Appeal is set aside and the matter remanded to the original authority, to consider the issue of nexus and all other issues in light of the Tribunal's earlier decision in Apotex Research Pvt. Ltd. & Others, where the same common order was previously remanded on the same footing.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 237 to 239-2011 dated 29/03/2011 passed by CCE(Appeals-II), Bangalore]
For approval and signature:
HON'BLE SHRI B.S.V.MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER
1 Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see 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 CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
3 Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?
4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?
YAHOO SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT INDIA PVT LTD 'TORREY PINES' EMBASSY GOLF LINKS, BUSINESS TECH PARK, OFF INDIRANAGAR KORAMANGALA INTERMEDIATE RING ROAD, BANGALORE 560 027 Appellant(s)
Versus
Commissioner of Service Tax BANGALORE-SERVICE TAX NULL 1ST TO 5TH FLOOR, TTMC BUILDING,above BMTC BUS STAND,DOMLUR BANGALORE, - 560071 KARNATAKA Respondent(s)
Appearance:
Ms. Sudeshna Bannerje, Advocate For the Appellant
Shri Mohd. Yusuf, Addl. Commissioner(AR) For the Respondent
Date of Hearing: 19/03/2015
Date of Decision: 19/03/2015
CORAM:
HON'BLE SHRI B.S.V.MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER
Final Order No. 20796 / 2015
Per : B.S.V. MURTHY
Both sides agree that the appeal arises from the common Order-in-Appeal No.237 to 239/2011 dt. 29/03/2011 and in respect of two appeals, the Final Order was passed by this Tribunal vide No.21898-21899/2014 dt. 15/10/2014. Since the issue arises from the same impugned order and the matter has already been decided in the final order referred to hereinabove and in that order appeals have been remanded to the original authority, in this case also, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the original authority with a direction to consider the issue of nexus and all other issues in the light of the decision in the case of Apotex Research Pvt. Ltd. & Others [2014-TIOL-1836-CESTAT-BANG].
(Order pronounced and dictated in open court)
B.S.V.MURTHY TECHNICAL MEMBER
Raja 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