2017 (10) TMI 852

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant and the learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent. Questions of law have been framed in the order 8 August 2017, which read thus:( i) Whether the Tribunal, under the facts and circumstances, was justified in holding that Notification No. 01/2006ST is in confrontation with the charging section, Section 66 of the Finance Act, 199....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... By an order dated 23 October 2008, the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise allowed the Appeal preferred by the Respondent on the ground that the tax liability was correctly discharged by M/s. Devi Constructions Co.Pvt.Ltd. and therefore, the Respondent being a subcontractor is entitled to refund. It is this order which was subjected to the Appeal before the CESTAT. 4. We have carefully peru....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the respondent assessee is entitled to refund and accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed." 5. In paragraph 5.1, the Tribunal held that in view of what is held by the Apex Court in case of the Larsen & Toubro Ltd. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh 2006 TIOL 327 HC HYD-VAT, the opinion rendered by the third Member of the Tribunal in the case of Sunil Hitech Engineers Ltd. Vs. Commissioner....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....We find that what is mentioned in paragraphs 5 and 5.1 cannot be even construed to mean that there is a general expression of agreement on the part of the CESTAT with the reasons recorded by the Commissioner. 8. Therefore, we are constrained to hold that the impugned judgment and order is perverse and hence, the same deserves to be set aside. Accordingly, we pass the following order. (....