IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
G.S. KULKARNI, RAJESH S. PATIL, JJ.
The Principal Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Mumbai – Appellant
Versus
ICICI Bank Ltd. – Respondent
Central Excise Appeal No. 13 of 2021
Decided On : 08-06-2023
Central Excise Act - Collection Agency Services - Section 35G, Section 35L - The judgment discusses the appeal filed under section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the applicability of Section 35L in relation to service tax. The court's decision highlights the exclusion in appealability of an order not relating to the determination of any question having a relation to the rate of duty of excise or to the value of goods for the purpose of assessment, and the necessity for the appellant to approach the Supreme Court by filing an appeal.
Fact of the Case:
The appeal filed by the revenue under section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 arises from the order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai. The substantial questions of law raised by the appellant relate to the taxability and valuation of Collection Agency Services rendered by the respondent during a specific period.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the issue in the present appeal is in regard to taxability and valuation, and the remedy for the appellant is to file an appeal before the Supreme Court in accordance with Section 35G(1) read with Section 35L(1)(b).
Issues: The issues revolve around the determination of taxability and valuation of Collection Agency Services rendered by the respondent, and the appeal's maintainability before the High Court.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision is based on the applicability of Section 35G and Section 35L of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the exclusion in appealability of orders not relating to the determination of any question having a relation to the rate of duty of excise or to the value of goods for the purpose of assessment.
Final Decision: The appeal is disposed of, permitting the appellant to file an appeal before the Supreme Court, and all contentions of the parties are expressly kept open.
JUDGMENT :
G.S. KULKARNI, J.
1. This appeal filed by the revenue under section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 arises from the order dated 14 January, 2020 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai disposing of Service Tax Appeal No. 86128 of 2014 filed by the respondent whereby the respondent’s appeal has been allowed.
2. The appellant has urged that the following substantial question of law for determination of this Court in the present proceedings:
(b) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that imposition of detriment is without authority of law merely because in view of typing mistake, Section 73(4) is invoked instead of 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994?
(c) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that taxing consideration earned from Liquidity Facility is in breach of the exemption afforded to interest?
(d) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that beneficiary of the facility is not the “Special Purpose Vehicle” but the assessee/respondent themselves and therefore, there is no service rendered to another person?”
3. Learned counsel for the respondent has raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of this Appeal before this Court on the ground of remedy available in terms of Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1944 read with Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short “CE Act”).
4. The question which arises for consideration necessarily in regard to the taxability and valuation of Collection Agency Services rendered by the respondent during the period October, 2007 to March, 2012 in realtion to assignment/securitization deals (ABS & MBS) originated prior to February, 2006. In such context, our attention has been drawn to the show cause notice dated 23 July, 2013 issued by the Department of Revenue to the respondent. The objection raised on behalf of the respondent is to the effect that when the question arises for determination in relation to the rate of duty of excise or to the value of goods for purposes of assessment, as excluded from the provisions of Section 35G, would be a question which would be required to be determined by the Supreme Court in Appeal as provided for in Section 35L(2) of the CE Act.
5. In the context of the objection as raised on behalf of the respondent, it would be appropriate to note all the three provisions:
The provisions of the following sections of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944), as in force from time to time, shall apply so far as may be, in relation to service tax as they apply in relation to a duty of excise (sub-section (2A) of Section 5A, sub-section (2) of Section 9A, 9AA, 9B, 9C, 9D, 9E, 11B, 11BB, 11C, 12, 12A, 12B, 12C, 12D, 14, 15, 15A, 15B, 31, 32, 32A to 32P (both inclusive), 33A, 34A, 35EE, 35F, 35FF to 35-O (both inclusive), 35Q, 35R, 36, 36A, 36B, 37A, 37B, 37C, 37D, 38A and 40.”
Section 35G - Appeal to High Court
(1) An Appeal shall lie to the High Court from every order passed in appeal by the Appellate Tribunal on or after the 1st day of July, 2003 (not being an order relating, amoung other things, to the determination of any question having a relation to the rate of duty of excise or to the value of goods for purposes of assessment), if the High Court is satisfied that the case involves a substantial question of law.
Section 35L - Appeal to the Supreme Court
(1) An appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court from:
(a) any judgment of the High Court delivered:
(i) in an appeal made under section 35G.
(ii) on a reference made under section 35G by the Appellate Tribunal before the 1st day of July, 2003.
(iii) on a r
Service tax is applicable to construction services provided to non-commercial state entities, and appeals on such matters regarding tax applicability must be taken to the Supreme Court.
Taxability of services under the business auxiliary service is a substantial question of law, necessitating appeals to the Supreme Court per Section 35L of the Central Excise Act.
An appeal under Section 117 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act is not maintainable if the Appellate Tribunal has not been constituted, and such matters must be taken to the Supreme Court under ....
Appeal to High Court - Indian Oil Corporation - Excise duty - If “among other things” matter relates to rate of duty of excise - Even if one of many issues relate to rate of duty, appeal would still ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.