2026-VIL-981-TEL-ST

SERVICE TAX High Court Cases

Service Tax – Authority of the Tribunal to constitute Larger Bench on conflicting High Court judgments - CESTAT observed conflicting views rendered by two different High Courts on interpretation of Section 142(3) of CGST Act, 2017. One judgment from jurisdictional High Court and another from another High Court on same issue. CESTAT directed constitution of Larger Bench to decide questions regarding refund of CENVAT credit in cash and doctrine of vested rights - Whether Tribunal can constitute a Larger Bench to examine conflicting High Court judgments and determine which judgment should be followed – HELD - Tribunal was confronted with unusual situation arising out of conflicting judgments rendered by two different High Courts on same issue. Judgment of jurisdictional High Court is binding on all Tribunals and subordinate Courts functioning within its territorial jurisdiction and cannot be ignored. The Tribunal ought not to have constituted a Larger Bench for purpose of examining correctness or applicability of judgment rendered by jurisdictional High Court as such exercise is impermissible in law - Judgment of jurisdictional High Court continues to bind all Tribunals unless it is stayed, reversed or overruled by Supreme Court. However, appropriate course for Tribunal would have been to defer further proceedings until Supreme Court renders decision in pending Special Leave Petition. It is impermissible for Tribunal to examine whether judgment of jurisdictional High Court should prevail over that of another High Court particularly when former is binding upon it – The order directing constitution of Larger Bench set aside. Service Tax Appeal shall remain pending and further proceedings deferred until final outcome of Special Leave Petition pending before Supreme Court – The writ petition stands allowed

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page