TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 1454
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve appearing for the revenue. 3.1 I have considered the impugned order along with the submissions made in appeal. 3.2 I find impugned order records as follows: "I find that the adjudicating authority had discussed the issue in detail in their discussion & findings of the impugned order dated 23.05.2022. The appellant had contended that they have rendered services to Government Department which is exempt from the net of Service Tax. In this regard, I find that the appellant had provided the various work contract services to M/s. BSNL and the said works were neither exempted Under Section 66D of the Act nor exempted vide notification No.25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012. I find that the adjudicating authority had verified that the ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by the adjudicating authority is sustainable. I also find that the appellant is required to deposit the interest of Rs.1,495/- under Section 75 of the Act for delay in payment of service tax for the period from F.Y.2014-15 to 2016-17 as shown in their ST-3 returns. The appeal is disposed of in the above cited manner." 3.3 Appellant has in the appeal memo, at Sl No 13 (i) himself disclosed that the total amount of demand for tax involved in the present appeal is "Rs 66,287/- (Rs 56,295/- + Rs 9,992/-)". As per Sr No 13 (iv) of the Appeal Memo, appellant has declared penalty amount to be "Rs 82,954/- under Section 78". At Sl No 17 of the appeal memo, following is declared: 17 Subject matter of dispute in order of priority. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ue, the difference in duty involved or the duty involved; or (ii) the amount of fine or penalty determined by such order, does not exceed two lakh rupees. 3.5 Section 86 (7) of the Finance Act, 1994 reads as follows: "(7) Subject to the provisions of this Chapter, in hearing the appeals and making orders under this section, the Appellate Tribunal shall exercise the same powers and follow the same procedure as it exercises and follows in hearing the appeals and making orders under the [Central Excise Act, 1944] (1 of 1944)." 3.6 Total amount of service involved in the present appeal as per the appellant himself is Rs.66,287/-. As per the appellant penalty is also Rs 82,954/-. As the total amount involved in the presen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... such order does not exceed two lakhs rupees. 4.4 The CESTAT may, at its discretion, refuse to admit an appeal, if the (a) duty involved or (b) difference of duty involved or (c) penalty involved is less than Rupees two lakhs. However, such appeal cannot be refused if the issue pertains to valuation or rate of duty. Originally the limit was rupees fifty thousand which has been enhanced to Rupees two lakhs, by Finance Act (No. 2), 2014, with effect from 6-8-2014. 4.5 Further, in the case of J.K. Sharma v. Government of India, 1993 (66) E.L.T. 66 (Mad.), it has been held that the minimum monetary limit prescribed under Section 131B of the Customs Act, 1962, as per the proviso applies to each clause separately and not cummula....