2009 (4) TMI 424

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . Ms. Joy Kumari Chander, JCDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T) (Oral)]. In terms of the impugned order, the appellants are required to pre-deposit the following sums : (a) Service Tax of Rs. 3,33,03,995/- (Rupees Three Crore Thirty Three Lakhs Three Thousand Nine Hundred Ninety five only) under provisions of Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 (b) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... arious input services availed by them. The appellants utilized the service tax credit for payment of the service tax on the above mentioned services. The Department took objection for the same on the ground that the above mentioned 4 services would not be considered as output services. The learned Advocate argued that as far as GTA services are concerned, only w.e.f. 1-3-2008 by virtue of an exe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... x liability cannot be through availing the Cenvat credit. 7. On a careful consideration of the issue, we find that only GTA services have been excluded from the scope of output services w.e.f. 1-3-2008. As far as the other services covered by Section 66A are concerned, there is no such exclusion. Prima facie, in our view, the appellants have a strong case on merits. Moreover, there is no revenue .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X