TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 1420
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....peals). The appellants are engaged in supply of gas in cylinders. The appellant allows their customers to retain the cylinders free of charge for a specific period of time. Wherever there is a delay in return of empty cylinders by the customers, appellant charged a certain amount from them. The present demand of service tax pertains to that extra sum collected by the appellant treating the said activity as supply of tangible goods service. The appellant has mentioned that Learned Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed the issue on technical grounds without discussing on merits. 2. The appellant was issued a show cause notice on 23.04.2012 covering the period from 16.05.2008 to 31.03.2012 for demanding service tax of Rs. 4,88,712/- under Pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uding machinery, equipment and appliances are given to the recipient for use, without transferring right of possession and effective control of such machinery, equipment and appliances. In this case, during the period of retention, cylinders remain in possession of the customers with effective control vested in the said customer. Neither the appellant has possession nor effective control on such cylinders and therefore, service tax under the said service category is not recoverable from them. In view of the above, they prayed for allowing the appeal by setting aside the impugned order. The appellant also enclosed copy of the agreement entered into with customer/dealers for supply of gas. 4. During hearing, Learned Advocate mentions th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appeal book), the customer merely has physical custody of cylinders till he consumes the gas but the effective control is with the appellant. In view of the above, learned AR prayed for upholding the order of the lower authority and rejecting the party's appeal. 6. Heard both the sides and seen the case records. We find that learned Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed party's appeal on the following grounds:- a) Bare address of the Company/Advocate is given in the appeal papers and no other contact information like telephone number or mobile number or email address is given. b) In appeal proforma ST-4, it is declared that Mr Yogen V Mahadevia, Advocate from Vadodara is engaged for the appeal and the notices may be sent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ets Pvt Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Mundra reported at 2024 (388) ELT 224 (Tri.-Ahmd.) has held that when deficiency in the appeal filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) is curable, the same could have been corrected and these cannot be a ground for rejection of appeal itself. Relevant para 5 of the said order is reproduced below:- "5. It is seen that Custom House Agent cannot file appeal under his signature and authorization. Such signature or authorization can be made only if the importer is not in India at the material time and the Custom House Agent or any other person duly authorized for filing appeal in terms of Rule 3 of Customs Appeal Rules, 1982. This deficiency should have been pointed out by the Commissioner (Appea....