{"id":259850,"date":"2022-01-11T17:00:14","date_gmt":"2022-01-11T11:30:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=259850"},"modified":"2022-01-14T11:43:38","modified_gmt":"2022-01-14T06:13:38","slug":"obiter-dictum-not-legally-binding-as-precedent","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/11\/obiter-dictum-not-legally-binding-as-precedent\/","title":{"rendered":"CESTAT | \u201dobiter dictum\u201d not legally binding as precedent; jurisdictional commissioner cautioned for filing frivolous applications"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): <\/strong>Suvendu Kumar Pati (Judicial Member) dismissed an appeal which was filed in response to the order passed by this Tribunal for rectification of mistake on the ground that the order to the extent of availment of service of outdoor catering was not proper.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Authorized representative for the respondent department cited various cases in support of the grounds wherein disallowing credit had not been considered.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Tribunal observed that in response to the points raised by the AR the Department wanted to get the review of the order in the guise of the rectification of mistake which had been discouraged by various forums including the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Tribunal was of the view that in the instant case no such error could be noticed in not placing any reliance on the judgment of ITC Ltd., 2019- TIOL- 2479- CESTAT- MAD, as it was an obiter dictum concerning which thread bore discussion had taken place during the course of argument and it was noticed that the submissions made by AR was erroneously taken as finding of the Larger Bench.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Tribunal further explained the term obiter dictum, and clarified that such decisions since are not binding should not be taken on record while deciding upon a case.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Tribunal also found that the jurisdictional commissioner was in the habit of making of bald allegations against the Court of Justice, for which a copy of this order was directed to be sent to the CBEC to caution him not to file such frivolous applications that constitute an offence of perjury. The appeal was dismissed.[Hawkins Cookers Ltd. v. Commr. Of CGST, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/gx999fIJ\"><b>2022 SCC OnLine CESTAT 1<\/b><\/a>, decided on 07-01-2022]<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h4><span style=\"color: #993300;\">Suchita Shukla, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.<\/span><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): Suvendu Kumar Pati (Judicial Member) dismissed an appeal which was filed in response to <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":201689,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,11],"tags":[32841,48308],"class_list":["post-259850","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-tribunals_commissions_regulatorybodies","tag-frivolous","tag-obiter-dictum"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>CESTAT | \u201dobiter dictum\u201d not legally binding as precedent; jurisdictional commissioner cautioned for filing frivolous applications | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"\u201dobiter dictum\u201d not legally binding as precedent\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/11\/obiter-dictum-not-legally-binding-as-precedent\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"CESTAT | \u201dobiter dictum\u201d not legally binding as precedent; jurisdictional commissioner cautioned for filing frivolous applications\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"\u201dobiter dictum\u201d not legally binding as precedent\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/11\/obiter-dictum-not-legally-binding-as-precedent\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2022-01-11T11:30:14+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2022-01-14T06:13:38+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/11\/obiter-dictum-not-legally-binding-as-precedent\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/11\/obiter-dictum-not-legally-binding-as-precedent\/\",\"name\":\"CESTAT | \u201dobiter dictum\u201d not legally binding as precedent; jurisdictional commissioner cautioned for filing frivolous applications | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/11\/obiter-dictum-not-legally-binding-as-precedent\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/11\/obiter-dictum-not-legally-binding-as-precedent\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-01-11T11:30:14+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-01-14T06:13:38+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"\u201dobiter dictum\u201d not legally binding as precedent\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/11\/obiter-dictum-not-legally-binding-as-precedent\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/11\/obiter-dictum-not-legally-binding-as-precedent\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/11\/obiter-dictum-not-legally-binding-as-precedent\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/11\/obiter-dictum-not-legally-binding-as-precedent\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"CESTAT | \u201dobiter dictum\u201d not legally binding as precedent; jurisdictional commissioner cautioned for filing frivolous applications\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"CESTAT | \u201dobiter dictum\u201d not legally binding as precedent; jurisdictional commissioner cautioned for filing frivolous applications | SCC Times","description":"\u201dobiter dictum\u201d not legally binding as precedent","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/11\/obiter-dictum-not-legally-binding-as-precedent\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"CESTAT | \u201dobiter dictum\u201d not legally binding as precedent; jurisdictional commissioner cautioned for filing frivolous applications","og_description":"\u201dobiter dictum\u201d not legally binding as precedent","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/11\/obiter-dictum-not-legally-binding-as-precedent\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2022-01-11T11:30:14+00:00","article_modified_time":"2022-01-14T06:13:38+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/11\/obiter-dictum-not-legally-binding-as-precedent\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/11\/obiter-dictum-not-legally-binding-as-precedent\/","name":"CESTAT | \u201dobiter dictum\u201d not legally binding as precedent; jurisdictional commissioner cautioned for filing frivolous applications | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/11\/obiter-dictum-not-legally-binding-as-precedent\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/11\/obiter-dictum-not-legally-binding-as-precedent\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg","datePublished":"2022-01-11T11:30:14+00:00","dateModified":"2022-01-14T06:13:38+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"\u201dobiter dictum\u201d not legally binding as precedent","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/11\/obiter-dictum-not-legally-binding-as-precedent\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/11\/obiter-dictum-not-legally-binding-as-precedent\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/11\/obiter-dictum-not-legally-binding-as-precedent\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/11\/obiter-dictum-not-legally-binding-as-precedent\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"CESTAT | \u201dobiter dictum\u201d not legally binding as precedent; jurisdictional commissioner cautioned for filing frivolous applications"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":222103,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/11\/14\/cestat-an-arbitrary-show-cause-notice-which-is-held-to-be-correct-in-principle-cannot-become-a-ground-to-re-open-a-case-under-guise-of-rectification-of-mistake\/","url_meta":{"origin":259850,"position":0},"title":"CESTAT | An arbitrary show cause notice which is held to be correct in principle cannot become a ground to re-open a case under guise of rectification of mistake","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 14, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Custom, Excise and Service Tax Appellant Tribunal (CESTAT): A Division Bench of Rachna Gupta (Judicial Member) and C.L. Mahar (Technical Member) dismissed a rectification appeal filed by the applicant. The applicant had submitted that the Tribunal in the impugned order had committed an error by not dealing with the following\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":254931,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/30\/if-the-issue-was-not-argued-during-hearing-and-while-dictating-the-order-in-the-open-court-can-it-be-raised-later-for-rectification\/","url_meta":{"origin":259850,"position":1},"title":"CESTAT | If the issue was not argued during hearing and while dictating the order in the open court, can it be raised later for rectification? Tribunal answers","author":"Editor","date":"September 30, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): The Coram of Ashok Jindal (Judicial Member) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) dismissed an application which the Revenue had filed for rectification of mistake on the ground that while entertaining the appeal, this Tribunal had dismissed the appeal filed by the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":263767,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/16\/cestat-amount-deposited-during-the-investigation-ipso-facto-becomes-pre-deposit-when-the-assessee-carries-the-dispute-before-the-appellate-forum\/","url_meta":{"origin":259850,"position":2},"title":"CESTAT | Amount deposited during the investigation, ipso facto, becomes pre-deposit when the assessee carries the dispute before the Appellate Forum","author":"Editor","date":"March 16, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal: Anil Choudhary (Judicial Member) dismissed applications filed by the Revenue pertaining to rectification of mistakes. All the appeals had arisen from the common order-in-appeal, whereby the claim of interest on the amount deposited during investigation, and was finally refunded on being successful in\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":260047,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/14\/jurisdiction-for-claim-of-refund-filed-initiated-to-be-dealt-under-the-provision-central-excise-law\/","url_meta":{"origin":259850,"position":3},"title":"CESTAT | Jurisdiction for claim of refund filed\/initiated to be dealt under the provision Central Excise law and not by the provision of CGST law","author":"Editor","date":"January 14, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): Ashok Jindal (Judicial Member) dismissed the application filed by the Revenue (CCE & ST, Panchkula) for ratification of mistake in a final order by the Tribunal which was noticed by the Applicant. The Tribunal dealt with two issues (a) whether to ratify\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":219618,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/16\/cestat-non-consideration-of-the-documents-in-support-of-claims-made-by-the-appellant-amounts-to-passing-a-non-speaking-order\/","url_meta":{"origin":259850,"position":4},"title":"CESTAT | Non-consideration of the documents in support of claims made by the appellant amounts to passing a non-speaking order","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 16, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai: Coram of P. Dinesha (Member)\u00a0 and P. Venkata Subba Rao (Member) allowed the application filed by the appellant to praying the Tribunal to recall and rehear the final order passed by the same Bench on 22-02-2018 on the ground that the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":255021,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/10\/01\/cestat-when-road-construction-is-exempt-is-every-activity-exempt-relating-to-the-road-construction-including-consulting-engineer-services-tribunal-answers\/","url_meta":{"origin":259850,"position":5},"title":"CESTAT | When road construction is exempt; is every activity exempt relating to the road construction including consulting engineer services? Tribunal answers","author":"Editor","date":"October 1, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): The Coram of Anil Choudhary (Judicial Member) and P. Anjani Kumar (Technical Member) allowed an appeal which was filed against the Order-in Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), CGST & Central Excise Appeal Commissionerate, Allahabad. Appellants were providing \u2018Consulting Engineer Service\u2019 taxable\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/259850","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=259850"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/259850\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/201689"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=259850"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=259850"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=259850"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}