2026 (8) TMI 852

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ("CESTAT"), Mumbai, in Appeal No. E/87070/2021-MUM. 2. Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties, we admit the present Appeal on the following substantial questions of law: "(a) Whether, upon remand, the Hon'ble CESTAT erred in law by restricting its consideration only to verification of Goods Transport Agency ("GTA") services, without examining the true nature of construction services and the Appellant's entitlement to credit thereon, thereby failing to discharge its duty as the final fact-finding authority to adjudicate the dispute on merits? (c) Whether denial of CENVAT credit of Rs. 1,85,400 on construction services used for setting up of a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....STAT has not dealt with the submissions made before it with respect to eligibility of CENVAT credit on construction services and on imposition of penalty. The consequence of the said disallowance was confirmation of tax demand, along with interest thereon and an equal amount of penalty. 6. It is the case of the Appellant that when proceedings in relation to its entitlement to CENVAT credit were initiated vide Show Cause Notice dated 11th April 2012, the charge against the Appellant for denial of credit was that it pertained to service tax paid on Goods Transport Agency ("GTA") services for transportation of material used by Ganga Constructions for the construction of the Appellant's factory building. Hence, it was alleged that such s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and has restricted its finding only on eligibility of CENVAT credit on GTA services. The CESTAT, being the final fact-finding authority under the statute, was duty bound to adjudicate on all issues arising from the record. Its failure to consider the aforesaid contentions and not render findings thereon amounts to failure to exercise jurisdiction vested in it. 9. We also observe that, in the first round of litigation, the CESTAT, vide its Final Order dated 21st December 2017, while remanding the matter, had categorically held that since the issue involved was of an interpretational nature, there was no reason to impose penalty upon the Appellant. Despite the aforesaid finding, in the remand proceedings, the original authority, vide Order....