2019 (11) TMI 1514

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ICIAL) Shri KS Ravishankar with Shri Anand N, Advocates for the appellant Shri Dilip Shinde, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the respondent ORDER PER: C J MATHEW This appeal arises from confirmation of demand of Rs. 4,74,70,902 under section 73 of Finance Act, 1994, along with interest of Rs. 8,33,425 under section 75 of Finance Act, 1994, besides imposition of penalty of Rs. 4,74,7....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cision of the Tribunal in Kansara Modler Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur-II [2013 (32) STR 209 (Tri-Del)] that was upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan in Union of India v. Kansara Modler Ltd [2018 (15) GSTL 255 (Raj)] and the special leave petition of Revenue was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It is further submitted that the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay had, in Co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r Ltd, it was held by the Tribunal that '6. If we read Rule 2(q) of Cenvat Credit Rules with Rule 2(1)(d)(iv), we find that appellant is a person liable to Service Tax. Once appellant is person liable to service tax, he becomes provider of taxable service under Rule 2(r) and consequently becomes output service provider under Rule 2(p) of the Cenvat Credit Rules. Revenue is also relying on....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ent have been accepted by the Revenue. This for the reason that it has not been challenged before this Court. Thus, on the above ground itself this appeal is liable to be dismissed as there is no justification pointed out in filing this appeal against the impugned order when the same has been accepted earlier by the Revenue. 6. In any case, the issue now stands concluded against the Reven....