Back
CUSTOM EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BOMBAY
GOWRI SHANKAR, J.
MRF Ltd. -Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise -Respondent
ST/5/2001-MUM
Decided On : 23-10-2001
Sabu Varghese,B.B. Sarkar
1. Appeal taken up for disposal with consent of both sides.
2. The Assistant Commissioner accepted the claim for refund of the service tax paid by the appellant and ordered to be paid to the Consumer Welfare Fund on the ground that it has not been shown as required by sub-section (2) of section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (which is made applicable to the service tax in question by section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 which levies the tax) that the incidence of the tax claimed as refund has not been passed on. On appeal from this order, the Commissioner (Appeals) held the appeal to be not maintainable by virtue of provisions of sections 116 and 117 of the Finance Act validating with retrospective effect that the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994 requiring that service tax will be paid by the users of the transporter. The appeal has become infructuous.
3. It is contended in the appeal that writ petitions of various parties one of which is of the U.P. State Sugar Corporation challenging the retrospective effect has been admitted by the Court. The fact of admission of a writ petition against the provisions of law does not amount that provision of law ceased to be valid. Till it is held to be invalid, such a provision of law is valid and is binding. The appeal is, therefore, not maintainable.
4. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
