SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

GUJARAT HIGH COURT
MR. VIKRAM NATH, CJ, MR. J.B.PARDIWALA, J
THE COMMISSIONER, CGST AND CENTRAL EXCISE COMMISSIONERATE – Appellant
Versus
M/S SHREE HINDUSTAN FABRICATORS – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: MR ANKIT SHAH
For the Respondents:

ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA)

1. This appeal is at the instance of the Revenue and is directed against the order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Branch, Ahmedabad dated 30.01.2020 by which the Tribunal partly allowed the appeal filed by the respondent.

2. The Tribunal while partly allowing the appeal held as under in paragraphs 6 and 6.1 respectively :

6.1 Similar, assertions have been made in case of all such three clients of the appellant. We find that specific clarity of charge has been made to levy Service Tax under the category of Business Auxiliary Service and no prejudice is caused to the appellant on account of this the demand under the head of Business Auxiliary Service is confirmed. The interest and penalty in respect of Business Auxiliary Service is also upheld. The demand of duty, interest and penalties in respect of demand under ECIS category is set aside.”

3. The appellant being dissatisfied with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal has come up with this appeal under Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 .

4. The Revenue has propo

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top