2009 (5) TMI 343

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s. Joy Kumari Chander, JCDR, for the Respondent. [Order per: T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. - This appeal has been filed against Order-in-appeal 65/2008 ST dated 4-4-2008 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise Customs and Service Tax (Appeals) Cochin. 2. We heard both sides. 3. The appellant M/s. Venpakal Advertisers Trivendraum are holders of Service tax registration under the category of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ) who passed the impugned order. He confirmed the demand made by the lower authority. 4. The appellants are aggrieved over the impugned order of the Commissioner (appeals). They have made several contentions arguing that during the relevant period they would not be liable for the service tax under the category 'of advertisement agency. They were arguing, they had only obtained the right to call f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is seen that there is no reasoning adduced to challenging the levy of service tax for the services rendered by them to their clients like KSRTC, Bank, Hindustan Latex etc., and other agencies. The appellants do not have any specific ground of objection on this score. Even for the demand of tax for services rendered to DAVP, their only contention is that many other agencies also have not paid the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X