Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Commissioner Of Service Tax vs M/S.Verizon Data Services on 5 January, 2021

Bench: T.S.Sivagnanam, R.N.Manjula

                                                                             CMA.No.3322 of 2014

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  DATED: 05.01.2021

                                                      CORAM :

                                      The Honourable Mr.Justice T.S.SIVAGNANAM
                                                          and
                                       The Honourable Ms.Justice R.N.MANJULA

                                       Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.3322 of 2014

                     Commissioner of Service Tax,
                     No.2054-I, IInd Avenue, 12th Main Road,
                     Anna Nagar, Chennai - 600 040.                             ...Appellant

                                                          Vs

                     1. M/s.Verizon Data Services
                               India Pvt. Limited,
                         th
                        9 Floor, Alltius Block,
                        Olympia Tech Park,
                        Plot No.1, SIDCO Industrial Estate,
                        Guindy, Chennai - 600 032.

                     2. Customs, Excise and Service
                               Tax Appellate Tribunal,
                        South Zonal Bench,
                        Shasthri Bhawan Annexe, 1st Floor,
                        No.26, Haddows Road,
                        Chennai - 600 006.                                      ...Respondents

                             Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 35G(2) of Central
                     Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994 against the
                     impugned order of the Hon'ble Tribunal in Final Order No.40078/2014


                     1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                                 CMA.No.3322 of 2014

                     dated 07.02.2014 and the Order-in-Original No.93/2010 dated 04.01.2010
                     passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai III Division,
                     Chennai may be restored.


                                     For Appellant:             Mr.T.L.Thirumalaisamy

                                     For Respondent:            Mr.Sriram Seshadri for R1
                                                                R2- Tribunal

                                                       JUDGMENT

(Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam,J) This appeal filed by the appellant under Section 35G(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 83 of Finance Act, 1994 is directed against the order dated 07.02.2014 made in Final Order No.40078/2014 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai ('the Tribunal' for brevity).

2. The appeal was admitted on 28.11.2014 on the following substantial questions of law:

“1. Whether the decision of the Tribunal in allowing the refund of CENVAT credit even without registration of the assessee under Section 69 of the Finance Act, 1994 is correct in law?
2/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ CMA.No.3322 of 2014

2. Whether Hon'ble CESTAT is correct in not considering the safeguards, conditions and limitations as stipulated in the Appendix to the Notification No.05/2006-CE (N.T) dated 14.03.2006?

3. Whether the Tribunal Final Order No.40078/2014 dated 07.02.2014 holding that all activities are covered within the first part of the definition of the input service under Rule 2(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 is correct in law?

4. Whether the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that various input services for which refund of cenvat credit is being claimed, is directly needed for providing output service?"

3. We have heard Mr. T.L.Thirumalaisamy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Revenue and Mr.Sriram Seshadri, learned counsel appearing for the first respondent.
4. The Revenue seeks to withdraw the case on account of low tax effect in terms of the circular dated 22.8.2019 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs. By the said Circular, the monetary limit for filing or pursuing any matter before the High Court has been increased to 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ CMA.No.3322 of 2014 Rs.1 Crore. It is further submitted that the tax effect in this case is less than the threshold limit.
5. In the light of the above, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed on the ground of low tax effect and the substantial questions of law raised are left open. In the event the tax effect is above the threshold limit fixed in the said circular, liberty is granted to the Revenue to file a petition before this Court to restore the matter to be heard and decided on merits. No costs.
                                                                         (T.S.S.,J.)    (R.N.M.,J.)
                                                                                05.01.2021
                     Index: Yes/No
                     Internet:Yes/No
Speaking Judgment/Non speaking Judgment hvk 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ CMA.No.3322 of 2014 To
1. Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Shasthri Bhawan Annexe, 1st Floor, No.26, Haddows Road, Chennai - 600 006.
2. Commissioner of Service Tax, No.2054-I, IInd Avenue, 12th Main Road, Anna Nagar, Chennai - 600 040.
5/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ CMA.No.3322 of 2014 T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J AND R.N.MANJULA,J hvk C.M.A.No.3322 of 2014

05.01.2021 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/