TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (5) TMI 18
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o be finally disposed of. Accordingly, after dispensing with pre-deposit, I proceed to deal with the appeal. 2. The appellants are clearing and forwarding agents. They rendered C & F agent's service to a client during the period September 1999 to October 2003 and paid tax on the commission received from the latter. The department found that the amounts of expenses incurred for the rendering of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....novo adjudication. The present appeal is against this remand order. 3. After examining the records and considering the submissions of learned Counsel and the learned SDR, I find that the entire case was remanded by the lower appellate authority for de novo adjudication. The operative part of the impugned order reads as under: "In view of the foregoing submissions, the impugned order-in-origi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... With reference to the above order, the learned Counsel has raised a contention that, as the original authority was directed to re-quantity the service tax liability in the light of the observations given in the table contained in. 7.6 of the impugned order, the substantive issue (whether the various expenses enumerated in the said table were includible or not in the "gross amount" for the purp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Commissioner (Appeals). The grievance raised in this regard seems to be genuine. As regards penalty, the Commissioner (Appeals) rightly left it to be quantified by the lower authority. The Commissioner (Appeals) also directed the original authority to pass speaking order in accordance with the principles of natural justice. These directions of the appellate authority do not warrant interference.....