Skip to content


M/S. Shri Lal Mahal Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtCustoms Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided On
Case NumberService Tax Appeal Nos. 60228 - 60229 of 2013- ST[SM] [Arising Out of Order-In-Appeal No. 51/ST/APPL/DLH-IV of 2013 dated 1.08.2013 & 53/ST/APPL/DLH-IV of 2013 dated 1.08.2013 both passed by Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi IV, Faridabad,]
Judge
AppellantM/S. Shri Lal Mahal Ltd
RespondentCommissioner of Central Excise
Excerpt:
.....the statutory levies and the reimbursable  expenses etc.  as also on the ground that whereas services stand provided by various agencies, invoices stand issued   by  other agencies acting on behalf of the service provider and the service recipient. 4. i find that the legal issue are no more res integra and stand decided by following decisions of the tribunal: 1. neelav jaiswal vs. cce allahabad [ait-2013-135-cestat]; 2. durhan spintex vs. cst, ahmedabad [2012 (28) str 366 (tri-ahmd)]; 3. indworth ltd. vs. cce, nagpur [2012 (25) str 78 (tri-mum)]; 4. cce, meerut i vs. ankushis enterprises [2013 (30str 612 (tri-del)]; 5. cce chandigarh vs. team s and s [2011 (21) str 290 (tri-del)]; 6. chowgule and co. (salt pvt. ltd. vs. cce rajkot [2013 (31) str  334 (tri-ahmd)] 5. suffice it.....
Judgment:

Archana Wadhwa, J.

1. Both the appeals are being disposed of by a common order as the issue involved is  identical.

2. After hearing both the sides, I find that the dispute relates to the refund of Service Tax paid on various services like clearing and forwarding agency, test analysis warehousing  storage and CHA service in terms of provision of notification No. 17/2009 -ST dated 7.7.09

3. On going through the impugned order, I find that  lower authorities  have rejected the refund claim on the ground that CHA should not have paid the service tax on the entire amount including the statutory levies and the reimbursable  expenses etc.  as also on the ground that whereas services stand provided by various agencies, invoices stand issued   by  other agencies acting on behalf of the service provider and the service recipient.

4. I find that the legal issue are no more res integra and stand decided by following decisions of the Tribunal:

1. Neelav Jaiswal vs. CCE Allahabad [AIT-2013-135-CESTAT];

2. Durhan Spintex vs. CST, Ahmedabad [2012 (28) STR 366 (Tri-Ahmd)];

3. Indworth Ltd. vs. CCE, Nagpur [2012 (25) STR 78 (Tri-Mum)];

4. CCE, Meerut I vs. Ankushis Enterprises [2013 (30STR 612 (Tri-Del)];

5. CCE Chandigarh vs. TEAM S and S [2011 (21) STR 290 (Tri-Del)];

6. Chowgule and Co. (Salt Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE Rajkot [2013 (31) STR  334 (Tri-Ahmd)]

5. Suffice it to say that each and every  objection of the Revenue stand covered by the above referred decisions.   As such, I  deem it fit to set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority for fresh decision in the light of law declared in the above referred matters as also after verification of the documentary evidence.

6. Appeals are allowed by way of remand.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //