The High Court allowed an appeal against a Tribunal order that had disposed of a case for statistical purposes due to a pending Supreme Court judgment on service tax. The Court held the appeal should be disposed of as no question of law arose.
The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of with no costs awarded.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 21.11.2019
CORAM :
The Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE Dr.VINEET KOTHARI
AND
The Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
C.M.A No.4059 of 2019
Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai Outer, No.2054-I, II Avenue, 12th Main Road, Anna Nagar, Chennai -600 040 .. Appellant -vs-
The Commissioner Ranipet Municipality, Railway Station Road, Ranipet 632 401 Tamil Nadu .. Respondent
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 35G of Central Excise Act, 1994 against the Final Order No.42133 of 2018 dated 19.07.2018 of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai.
For Appellant : Mr.T.R. Senthilkumar Sr. Standing Counsel
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by Dr.VINEET KOTHARI, J.,)
By the impugned order of the learned Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai dated 19.07.2018, the learned Tribunal has only disposed of the Appeal for statistical purpose by observing that the issue relating to imposition of Service Tax on the rental of the immovable property is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court with a liberty to the parties to file for revival of the appeal once the Hon'ble Supreme Court pronounces the Judgment. The relevant portion of the order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai dated 19.07.2018 are quoted hereunder for ready reference:-
“ 5.3 Discernibly, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has found it proper to defer decisions in these matters awaiting the judgment of the nine Judge Bench in Mineral Area Development Authority and Others (supra). Viewed in this light, we
are of the considered opinion, that in the interests of justice, all these appeals should be kept in abeyance pending the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in all the three cases referred to supra, namely UTV News Ltd. (supra), Home Solutions Retails India Ltd. (supra) and Ritika Pvt. Ltd. (supra), since the final outcome therein will have a translational impact and affect the decision in all such matters as covered in these appeals.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar (CO)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
sr
To
Chennai -600 040
+1cc to Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No. 97437
C.M.A.No.4059 of 2019
CP(CO) GN(30/12/2019)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1994 should be allowed to proceed given the Supreme Court's pending decision on service tax on property rental
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai Outer
The Commissioner Ranipet Municipality
VINEET KOTHARI
C.SARAVANAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
