The principal Commissioner, Central Goods & Services Tax, Commissionerate-Meerut Versus M\/s Bajaj Hindusthan Sugar Limited, Unit-Bhaisana
Central Excise
2018 (2) TMI 704 – CESTAT, ALLAHABAD – TMI
CESTAT, ALLAHABAD – AT
Dated:- 8-12-2017
E\/70499\/2017-EX[SM] – A\/70022\/2018-SM[BR]
Central Excise
Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical)
\nShri Gyanendra Kumar Tripathi, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for Appellant
\nShri Shubham Agrawal, Advocate, for Respondent
\nPer: Anil G. Shakkarwar
\nThe present appeal filed by Revenue is arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. MRT\/EXCUS\/000\/APPL-I\/14\/2017-18 dated 17\/04\/2017 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals-I), Meerut.
\n2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondents w<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n ded by or belonging to their clients and therefore, it was covered under 'Business Auxiliary Service'. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The principal Commissioner, Central Goods & Services Tax, Commissionerate-Meerut Versus M\/s Bajaj Hindusthan Sugar Limited, Unit-BhaisanaCentral Excise2018 (2) TMI 704 – CESTAT, ALLAHABAD – TMICESTAT, ALLAHABAD – ATDated:- 8-12-2017E\/70499\/2017-EX[SM] – A\/70022\/2018-SM[BR]Central ExciseMr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri Gyanendra Kumar Tripathi, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for Appellant Shri Shubham Agrawal, Advocate, for Respondent Per: Anil G. … Continue reading “The principal Commissioner, Central Goods & Services Tax, Commissionerate-Meerut Versus M\/s Bajaj Hindusthan Sugar Limited, Unit-Bhaisana”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-10411","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10411","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=10411"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10411\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=10411"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=10411"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=10411"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n4. Heard the ld. A. R., who has presented the grounds of appeal.
\n5. Heard the ld. Counsel for the appellant, who has submitted that the issue is no more res-integra in view of the Final Order No. 71097\/2017 dated 08\/09\/2017 passed by this Tribunal in respect of the respondent. The ld. Counsel further submitted that the issue is same in the said Final Order dated 08\/09\/2017, for a different period and other unit of the same respondent.
\n6. Having considered the contentions from both the sides and on perusal of the said Final Order dated 08\/09\/2017. I am of the view that the issue involved in the said Final Order was same regarding rights <\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n