AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (12) TMI 564
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e penalty. 2. The Petitioner-Bank is engaged in providing banking and financial services to its customers. On 22 May 2007, an inquiry was initiated by the Respondent against the Petitioner in respect of payment of service tax on "Currency Conversion Charges"/"Mark-up Fee". The Petitioner received a show cause notice dated 18 October 2007 demanding service tax amounting to Rs. 2,00,06,642/-, Education Cess of Rs. 3,76,728/- along with interest. The Petitioner submitted a reply to the show cause notice, and upon hearing, the Respondent Commissioner passed an order on 28 July 2009 confirming the demand and interest. Thereupon the Petitioner filed an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal on 26 November 2009. The Tribunal passed an order on 14 J....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o to the root. Third, it is argued that the Tribunal, while passing the impugned judgment and order, has refused to follow the decisions of the co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal in the case of SBI Card and Payments Services Pvt Ltd Vs. Commr. Of S.T., New Delhi 2016 (41) S.T.R. 846 (Tri-Del) and the decision of Citi Bank Vs Commissioner of S. Tax 2016 (43) S.T.R. 445 (Tri. - Chennai). The Tribunal could not have refused to follow the law laid down and should have referred the matter for consideration to a larger bench as a matter of judicial discipline. As held by the Division bench of this Court in the case of Mercedes Benz India Pvt Ltd Vs Union of India 2010 (252) E.L.T. 168 (Bom.), it is a matter of judicial discipline to refer the matt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dvanced by the Petitioner on merits are open to the Petitioner to urge in the appeal. Learned counsel for the Respondent further submitted that decisions cited by the learned counsel for the Petitioner are distinguishable, and they arise from different facts. Learned counsel further submitted that in the appeals filed by the Respondent-Department against the decision in the case of SBI Card and Payments Services Pvt Ltd in the Hon'ble Supreme Court, a notice is issued in the appeal, and the appeals are pending. Learned counsel for the Respondent submitted that, therefore, the issue dealt with by the Tribunal in the impugned order is debatable, and the appropriate remedy is filing an appeal. 7. The Division bench of this Court in the d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....impugned decision, we find that the Tribunal has sought to reconcile the decisions in the cases of SBI Card and Payments Services Pvt Ltd and Citi Bank and of the larger bench in Standard Chartered Bank. Tribunal has considered the decisions of the co-ordinate benches and that of the larger bench and, in its opinion, found that the decisions of the larger bench have not been considered in proper perspective and that it will follow the decision of the larger bench. This view could ultimately be found in appeal as erroneous in law, but it cannot be considered as indiscipline. The Tribunal can conclude that it will follow the decision of larger bench. Though the words per incuriam have not been specifically used but the reasoning of the Tribun....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Services Pvt. Limited reference is made to the decision to the case of Shivsagar Veg Restaurant Vs. Asstt. Commr. of Income Tax, Mumbai ITXA No. 144 of 2006, decided on 14 November 2008. wherein the Division bench of this Court had referred to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of R.C. Shama v. Union of India 1976 (3) SCC 474., that unless explained by an extraordinary circumstance, it is highly undesirable that there should be a gap between the conclusion of arguments and the order. In the case of Infra Dredge Services Pvt. Limited, the Court found that the delay of 6 months was not satisfactorily explained. In the case at hand, the situation of the Covid-2019 pandemic was extraordinary and therefore delay in this case w....