PCP Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Mumbai
Service Tax
2018 (7) TMI 789 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMI
CESTAT MUMBAI – AT
Dated:- 21-6-2018
Appeal No. ST\/86239\/2018 – A\/86776\/2018
Service Tax
Dr. Suvendu Kumar Pati, Member (Judicial)
\nShri P.K. Shetty, Advocate for the appellant
\nShri Atul Sharma, (AR) for the respondent
\nORDER
\nBeing aggrieved by the Order-in- Appeal No. PK\/200\/APPEAL THANE\/TH\/2017-18\/1612 dated 17.01.2018 passed by the Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Mumbai confirming order of duty demand, interest and penalty passed by the adjudicating authority i.e. Additional Commissioner, Service tax Audit III, Mumbai, Appellant has approached this Tribunal for relief on the ground<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Sharma, applicability of sub-rule 3AA to the appellant's case, since adjudication order was passed on 15.09.2016 i.e. much after the applicability of sub-rule 3AA is analysed. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" PCP Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, MumbaiService Tax2018 (7) TMI 789 – CESTAT MUMBAI – TMICESTAT MUMBAI – ATDated:- 21-6-2018Appeal No. ST\/86239\/2018 – A\/86776\/2018Service TaxDr. Suvendu Kumar Pati, Member (Judicial) Shri P.K. Shetty, Advocate for the appellant Shri Atul Sharma, (AR) for the respondent ORDER Being aggrieved by the Order-in- … Continue reading “PCP Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Mumbai”<\/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-12587","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12587","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=12587"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12587\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=12587"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=12587"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=12587"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n3. Before giving any finding on this, it is imperative to have a look at the bare taxes of the rule which reads as under:-
\n“(3AA) Where a manufacturer or a provider of output service has failed to exercise the option under sub-rule (3) and follow the procedure provided under sub-rule (3A), the Central Excise Officer competent to adjudicate a case based on amount of CENVAT credit involved, may allow such manufacturer or provider of output service to follow the procedure and pay the amount referred to in clause (ii) of sub-rule (3), calculated for each of the months, <\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n