M/s. Maltanb Construction Engineers Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise Coimbatore
Service Tax
2019 (2) TMI 88 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 20-11-2018
ST/ROM/40363 & 40364/2018 in ST/24 and 139/2011 – Misc. Order Nos. 40787 & 40788/2018
Service Tax
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical)
Shri G. Derrick Sam, Advocate for the Appellant
Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy, Addl. Commr. (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
Per Ms. Sulekha Beevi,
The above ROM applications have been filed by the appellant seeking to rectify the error alleged to be apparent inn Final Order No. 43445 & 43446/2017 dated 20.12.2017.
2. The ld. counsel Shri G. D
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
rgued that though the service tax in respect of cleaning services rendered by the appellant to education institution was set aside, the cleaning services in respect of certain hospitals which are charitable institutions under the Income Tax Act have been upheld by the Tribunal for the normal period, which requires interference in these ROM applications.
3. The ld. AR Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy opposed the applications.
4. Heard both sides.
5. The ld. counsel has adverted to our attention to para 6.1 of the impugned order and argued that the Tribunal has erroneously concluded that when fees are collected for treatment, they would become commercial building. It is pointed out by him that there are several decision which hold that mere charg
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
me within the ambit of non-commercial entity. However, this depends upon facts of each case and the Tribunal after examining the facts of the case has made such observation and directed for re-examination of these facts on this issue.
6. From the discussions made above, we do not find any error apparent on the face of record that requires interference. An error apparent on the face of record should be so patent and also does not require any long drawn process of argument. In the present case, it is the conclusion or finding made by the Tribunal and is not an error apparent on the face of record. We do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned order. ROM dismissed.
(Operative portion of the order was pronounced in open Court)
Ca
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =