2018 (4) TMI 1318

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nch, West Block No.2, New Delhi. 2. This appeal is admitted on the following substantial question of Law:- "A. Whether the order dated 12.08.2015 passed by the CESTAT deserved to be set aside since its finding that service tax is liable on works contract service prior to 01.06.2007 is vitiated in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in civil appeal no.6770/2004 in CCE Vs. M/s Larsen and Tubro Ltd. B. Whether the order dated 29.03.2017 passed by the CESTAT deserves to be set aside because even a subsequent decision rendered by the Supreme Court would render the findings in an earlier order of CESTAT as mistake of law apparent on record and would entitle the CESTAT to recall its order to bring it in confo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bmitted that the law is well settled if the judgment on the basis of which the appeal has been dismissed and the same has been corrected by the Superior Court, then on the basis of the aforesaid rectification, application can be filed and the same is maintainable. 6. The learned Tribunal has wrongly rejected the prayer for review on the ground that even rectification application on the aforesaid ground is not maintainable. 7. He further submitted that after 12.08.2015 the application for review (rectification) filed under Section 35EQ has been dismissed on 29.03.2017 and thereafter on 05.10.2017 the present appeal has been filed. 8. This appeal is within the period of 180 days and therefore, oral objection raised by the learned cou....