2023 (3) TMI 67

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....etitioner : Mr. Ishaan Patkar a/w Ms. Chaitali Raul i/b Jindagi Shah   For the Respondents : Mr. Pradeep Jetly, Senior Advocate with Mr. Jitendra B. Mishra and Mr. Ram Ochani. P.C. : Petitioner is a private limited company. Respondent no.1 is Union of India, Respondent No.2 is Chief Commissioner of GST, Respondent No. 3 is Commissioner of Service Tax and Respondent No. 4 is Joint Sec....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....21, Writ Petition No. 3546/2021 and Writ Petition No. 3544/2021. 4. The aggrieved parties filed appeals before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeal). The Appellate Authority held in favour of the Petitioner. 5. In all the appeals thereafter, Respondent No. 3-Commissioner of Service Tax filed appeals before the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ("CESTAT") against the appe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the issue is of refund of CENVAT credit and the impugned orders are passed by the First Appellate Authority. Then the Tribunal states that it is submission at bar that as per Section 117 of the Finance Act, 2015 the case needs to be decided by the Joint Secretary. Thereafter, the Tribunal referred to Section 117 and concludes that appeal needs to be decided by the Government of India and not by th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oceeded on the basis of consensus at the bar that appeal needs to be transferred as revision to the Revisional Authority. If there was an error on the part of the Petitioner in stating that Revision will have to be decided and not an appeal, and that by consent jurisdiction cannot be conferred, it is appropriate that the Petitioner brought this 'mistake', to the notice of the Tribunal. It is then ....