TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (6) TMI 220
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....smissed the appellant's appeal (Revenue's appeal) as the amount involved was less than Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore Vs. Ranka & Ranka reported in 2012 (284) E.L.T. 185 (Kar.). It has further been stated in the application that the respondent had also filed cross objection (cross appeal) bearing Appeal No. ST/CO/2/2012 in Appeal No. ST/399/2011. Since, they were also aggrieved by portion of the Commissioner (Appeals) order to the extent of confirming the demand of service tax along with interest and penalties. The said prayer was specifically made in Form ST-6 at Column No. 6 as also in the prayer. W....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....espondent, on going through the record, I consider that the appeal can be decided even in their absence and accordingly it is taken up for final decision." Learned consultant submitted that from the language of the order it appeared that the Tribunal is deciding the matter in favour of the respondent on the basis of the record but in fact the respondent is aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the Commissioner and therefore the respondent had also filed cross objection in the appeal filed by the Department. He further submitted that the applicant has also filed an affidavit on record justifying the delay in filing the present application. In support of his submissions, he relied upon the following decisions: a) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sp; Vibha Fluid Systems Engineering Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India 2013 (287) E.L.T. 29 (Guj.) d) Kirtikumar Jawaharlal Shah Vs. Union of India 2012 (282) E.L.T. 217 (Bom.) e) Commissioner of Central Excise, Calcutta Vs. A.S.C.U. Ltd, 2003 (151) EL.T. 481 (S.C) f) Commissioner of C.Ex, Bangalore-III Vs. McDowell & Co. Ltd. 2005 (186) E.L.T. 145 (Kar) 5. After hearing the submissions of both the parties and the perusal of the judgments cited at bar, I am of the view that the disposal of the cross objection by the applicant while disposing the appeal of the Revenue is wrong and is liable to be recalled. First of a....