2005 (7) TMI 385

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... jaj, Member (J)]. In this appeal which has been preferred against the impugned order-in-appeal, the issue involved is as to whether the appellants as a recipient of the service regarding the installation and commissioning of the machinery imported by them from M/s. STEAG HamaTech AG Ferdinand-von-Steinbeis-Ring, Germany (in short S.H.T.) during the period Dec 2000 to Dec 2001, are liable t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he disputed period only S.H.T. company is liable to pay the service tax. 3. Besides this, from the perusal of the agreement copy of which has been placed on the file, entered between the appellants and the company S.H.T - the service provider, it cannot be concluded that the appellants had been appointed as authorised agent by that company during the period in dispute. Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X