ST - DG, ST is not proper authority for passing any order under Chapter V of FA, 1994 & orders passed by such authority are not appealable before CESTAT
IN pursuance of the order of the Bombay High Court in Writ Petition no. 3169/2004, the Director General of Service Tax, Mumbai had inter alia passed the following order dated 13/12/2005 () -
"…, I conclude that the aforesaid services rendered, under the IATA Cargo Agency Agreement by the members of the Association (The Air Cargo Agents), are covered within the scope of "Business Auxiliary Services" and the Air Cargo Agents are liable to pay service tax on the remuneration/consideration received by the agents for such activities, since 01.07.2003 under section 68 of the Finance Act, 1994.
All such service providers must discharge the service tax liability forthwith. They shall also be liable to pay interest, if any, for their past liabilities under Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994."
Against this order, the Association had filed an appeal ST/019/2006 before the CESTAT.
Incidentally, the Bombay High Court vide order dated 27/02/2008 recalled its order passed in Writ Petition no. 3169/2004 and further vide order dated 25/02/2009 the petitioner was allowed to withdraw the petition.
The appeal filed before the CESTAT was heard recently.
The Bench narrated the sequence of events and then observed -
"…Therefore, there is no order pending for consideration of this Tribunal in the impugned case.
2. In any case, Director General of Service Tax is not the proper authority for passing any order under Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994 and the orders passed by such authority are not appealable before this Tribunal."
The appeal was, therefore, dismissed as infructuous.
We said this in 2006:
While reporting the order of the DGST DDT 287 - 20 01 2006 observed, "This raises another issue. Obviously the agents will be aggrieved by the order of the DG, Service Tax and would like to go in appeal. Where will they go in appeal? The Tribunal or High Court? As per section 86 of the Finance Act, 1994, an appeal to the Tribunal lies against an order of the Commissioner passed under Section 73, 83A or 84 or an order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The order passed by the DG does not fall under any of these categories. So the Tribunal is out."