Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2015 (9) TMI 424

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uestions of law for consideration :- "1) Whether every service rendered in mining area would have to be classified under "Mining Service" or it has to be classified according to its scope and nature of the work? 2) Whether the service as defined in the scope of the contract could be more appropriately classifiable under "Cargo Handling Services"? 3) Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the limestone and rejects are not goods?" 2. The facts, in a nutshell, are as hereunder :- The assessee was engaged in the activity of loading, unloading and transportation of limestone from the mines of M/s. Chettinad Cement Corporation on contract basis. According to the Department, the said activities are covered under the category....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t and perused the order passed by the Tribunal and other documents. 5. At the outset, learned counsel for the first respondent objected to the maintainability of the appeal before this Court on the above questions of law raised by the department. It is the plea of the learned counsel for the first respondent that Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 provides that an appeal on the issue relating to rate of duty of excise or value of goods for purposes of assessment would not lie before this Court. He placed strong reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in Navin Chemicals Manufacturing and Trading Co. Ltd. - Vs - Collector of Customs (1993 (68) ELT 3 (SC)), wherein it is held as under:- "11. It will be seen that sub-sectio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat relates directly and proximately to the value of goods for purposes of assessment. The statutory definition of the said expression indicates that it has to be read to limit its application to cases where, for the purposes of assessment, questions arise directly and proximately as to the rate of duty or the value of the goods. 12. This, then, is the test for the purposes of determining whether or not an appeal should be heard by a Special Bench of CEGAT, whether or not a reference by CEGAT lies to the High Court and whether or not an appeal lies directly to the Supreme Court from a decision of CEGAT: does the question that requires determination have a direct and proximate relation, for the purposes of assessment, to the rate of duty ....