Revenue appeal not maintainable after connected merits decision set aside the same adjudication in toto

A Revenue appeal against an order granting cum tax benefit was held to have no surviving controversy where the same Order-in-Original had already been set aside in toto on merits in the assessee's connected appeal. The earlier decision relied on the retrospective amendment introduced by Notification No. 45/2010-ST, so the foundational adjudication no longer subsisted. As a result, no effective grievance remained for the Revenue to pursue, and the appeal was rejected as not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Revenue's appeal against the order granting cum tax benefit could survive after the very same order had already been set aside in toto in the assessee's appeal on merits.

Analysis: The appeal arose from the same Order-in-Original that had been independently examined in the assessee's appeal. That order had already been set aside in toto on merits by the Bench, relying on the retrospective amendment introduced by Notification No. 45/2010-ST. Since the foundational adjudication itself no longer survived, no effective grievance remained for the Revenue to pursue in the present appeal.

Conclusion: The Revenue's appeal was not maintainable on the surviving controversy and was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The prior setting aside of the adjudication on merits extinguished the basis of the Revenue's challenge, leaving the Revenue without relief.

Ratio Decidendi: When the underlying adjudication has already been set aside in toto on merits in a connected appeal, a revenue appeal against the same order does not survive.

---