AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (4) TMI 911
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Commissioner (Appeals) in pursuance of the directions of this Tribunal in final order dated 2.12.2014. 2. The appellant is registered with the service tax under the category of 'Business Auxiliary Services'. It entered into a Service and Support Agreement dated 1.4.2005 with GAP International to provide sourcing support for procuring fabrics, accessories, inspection, quality control, price negotiation, documentation, etc. to promote the business opportunities for GAP International. 3. As the appellant had rendered the services to an international organisation, it filed 17 refund applications seeking refund of accumulated Cenvat credit under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 [CCR] read with Notification No. 5/2006-CE (NT) da....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (iv) the issue is no longer res integra and this Tribunal has already held so in the case of the appellant itself for the period January 2010 to March 2010 and allowed refunds by Final Order No. 54014/2016-ST (SM) dated 4.8.2016; and (v) judicial discipline has to be followed and the Commissioner (Appeals) was bound to follow the decision of this Tribunal but he did not. 8. Learned authorised representative for the Revenue supported the impugned order and made the following submissions: (i) the services rendered by the appellant to M/s. GAP International do not qualify as 'export of services' under Export of Services Rules, 2005; (ii) the definition of input service as per Rule 2(l) of the CCR was not met....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....8.2016 set aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and allowed the appellant's appeal. 12. For another period, in the appellant's own case, this Tribunal, by final order No. 54795/2014 dated 2.12.2014, allowed refund following Paul Merchants. 13. In this case, the Commissioner (Appeals) displayed gross judicial indiscipline and refused to follow the orders of this Tribunal on the ground that Paul Merchants was not accepted by the department and a Civil Appeal has been filed before the Supreme Court. 14. The question of judicial discipline was examined by a three member bench of the Supreme Court in Union of India versus Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. [1991 (55) E.L.T. 433 (S.C.)] The Assistant Collectors in that cas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., one of the Collector (Appeals) and the other of the Tribunal. The High Court has, in our view, rightly criticised this conduct of the Assistant Collectors and the harassment to the assessee caused by the failure of these officers to give effect to the orders of authorities higher to them in the appellate hierarchy. It cannot be too vehemently emphasised that it is of utmost importance that, in disposing of the quasi-judicial issues before them, revenue officers are bound by the decisions of the appellate authorities. The order of the Appellate Collector is binding on the Assistant Collectors working within his jurisdiction and the order of the Tribunal is binding upon the Assistant Collectors and the Appellate Collectors who function unde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to apply to the Collector (Appeals) for the determination of such points arising out of the decision or order as may be specified by the Collector of Central Excise in his order and there is a further right of appeal to the department. The position now, therefore, is that, if any order passed by an Assistant Collector or Collector is adverse to the interests of the Revenue, the immediately higher administrative authority has the power to have the matter satisfactorily resolved by taking up the issue to the Appellate Collector or the Appellate Tribunal as the case may be. In the light of these amended provisions, there can be no justification for any Assistant Collector or Collector refusing to follow the order of the Appellate Collector or ....