Appellate order set aside where the real service tax liability issue for GTA services was not decided, and remand was required.

The appellate order was defective because it addressed abatement, which had already been allowed, instead of the real dispute whether the GTA service provider had discharged service tax on the disputed amount. As that core issue had not been examined or decided, the order could not be sustained. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the correct issue arising in the appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellate order had decided the actual dispute regarding discharge of service tax liability by the GTA service provider, and whether the matter required remand for consideration of the correct issue.

Analysis: The dispute before the appellate authority was not confined to the availability of abatement, which had already been allowed by the adjudicating authority. The real controversy was whether the GTA service provider had discharged service tax on the disputed amount. As that question had not been considered and decided, the appellate order could not stand.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the appropriate dispute involved in the appeal.

---