Cc, Chennai Vs. M/S. Sms Distribution Pvt. Ltd. and Another

Cc, Chennai vs M/S. Sms Distribution Pvt. Ltd. and Another

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai Decided Jul 08, 2010

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/941832

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/941832
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Judge: The Honourable Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice President
Decided On: Jul 08, 2010
Case Number: C/S/149 - 150 of 2010 & C/201 - 202 of 2010
Subject: Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue: Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Cc, Chennai

Advocate Shri T.H. Rao, SDR, for the appellant. Shri S. Krishnanadh, Adv., for the respondent.

Respondent

M/S. Sms Distribution Pvt. Ltd. and Another

Excerpt

after hearing both sides on the applications for stay of operation of the impugned order of the commissioner (appeals), i find that the appeals themselves can be disposed of at this stage and hence proceed to take up the appeals with the consent of both sides, after rejecting the stay applications of the revenue. the direction given by the commissioner (appeals) vide impugned orders for remand of the case to the lower authority is challenged by the revenue, on the ground that after amendment of the statutory provisions, the commissioner (appeals) no longer has the power of remand. 2. i find that this issue stands settled by the judgment of the hon’ble gujarat high court in cce, ahmedabad vs. medico labs - 2004 (173) elt 117 (guj.), holding that the commissioner (appeals) continues to have the power of remand even after the amendment of section 35a (3) of the central excise act, 1944. the high court’s decision cited supra has been followed by the tribunal in cce, pondicherry vs. neycer (i) ltd. vide final order no. 1789 and 1790/09 dated 17.11.09. following the ratio of the above, i uphold the impugned orders of remand and dismiss the appeals.

Full Judgment

After hearing both sides on the applications for stay of operation of the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals), I find that the appeals themselves can be disposed of at this stage and hence proceed to take up the appeals with the consent of both sides, after rejecting the stay applications of the Revenue. The direction given by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide impugned orders for remand of the case to the lower authority is challenged by the Revenue, on the ground that after amendment of the statutory provisions, the Commissioner (Appeals) no longer has the power of remand.

2. I find that this issue stands settled by the judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in CCE, Ahmedabad Vs. Medico Labs - 2004 (173) ELT 117 (Guj.), holding that the Commissioner (Appeals) continues to have the power of remand even after the amendment of Section 35A (3) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The High Court’s decision cited supra has been followed by the Tribunal in CCE, Pondicherry Vs. Neycer (I) Ltd. vide Final Order No. 1789 and 1790/09 dated 17.11.09. Following the ratio of the above, I uphold the impugned orders of remand and dismiss the appeals.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chen... Same Parties Cc, Chennai vs M/S. Sms Distribution Pvt. Ltd. and Another Same Subject Service Tax Same Judge The Honourable Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice President