By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, MAR 25, 2015: AGAINST an Order passed by the Commissioner (A), Nashik the appellant is before the CESTAT.

At the outset the Bench observed that the issue needs reconsideration by the first appellate authority because -

"…We find that adjudication order clearly indicates the services rendered by the appellant/assessee would fall under the category of “management, maintenance or repair service”. The first appellate authority, has mis-directed himself and classfied the services rendered by the appellant under consultancy service. We find that the first appellate authority has been frugal in words while recording the reasoning for upholding the order of the adjudicating authority. The first appellate authority is required to give detailed reason why he has upholding their order of the adjudicating authority. In the absence of any detailed reasoning, we are unable to go into the matter…."

The order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the first appellate authority to re-consider the issue afresh after following the principles of natural justice.

The appeal was allowed by way of remand.

(See 2015-TIOL-549-CESTAT-MUM)