2015 (9) TMI 889

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....: Mr. Tarun Gulati with Mr. Shashi Mathews, Mr. Sparsh Bhargava, Advocates. ORDER CM APPL No. 5536/2015 (for delay) 1. For the reasons stated therein, the delay of 83 days in filing the present petition is condoned. 2. The application is dismissed. CEAC 15/2015 & CM APPL No. 5535/2015 (for stay) 3. This appeal, under Section 35 G of the Central Excises Act, 1944 ('CE Act') read w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....negative and in favour of the Assessee. The appeal by the Commissioner of Service Tax against the said decision being CEAC No. 99 of 2014 was dismissed by this Court by order dated 18th November 2014 on the ground of maintainability. 6. A preliminary objection has been raised by the Respondent as regards the maintainability of the present appeal before this Court. Reliance is placed on the deci....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....include a determination as levy of tax on a particular service. It was held that "The words 'rate of tax' in relation to rate of tax would include the question whether or not the activity is exigible to tax under a particular or specific provision." Accordingly, it was held that an appeal under Section 35-G of the CE Act against the order of the CESTAT on the question of exigibility of a s....