9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 304X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r 2006 by the appellant, as valid documents for availment of the exemption benefit of the notifications and accordingly the demand under the impugned order is set aside - in favour of assessee. - Service Tax Appeal No.-253/2012 - - - Dated:- 21-8-2012 - SRI S.K. GAULE, DR.D.M. MISRA, JJ. Sri G.C. Sarkar, Advocate FOR APPELLANTS Sri S. Chakraborty, Addl. Commr . (A.R.) FOR THE RESPONDENTS Per SRI S.K. GAULE Heard both sides. 2. Revenue filed this appeal against order in appeal No.70/Bol/2012 dated- 7.3.2012 whereby Ld . Commissioner (Appeal) has set aside the lower adjudicating authority s order. 3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the respondent is registered under category of goods transport wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd the Ld . Commissioner s order is thus not sustainable. 5. The contention of the respondent is that they have made a general declaration as per Board Circular. The period involved in their case is from April, 2005 to September, 2006 and they have filed a general declaration alongwith relevant invoices as per the Board Circular No. 137/154/2008-CX.4 Dated: August 21, 2008. Thus they have fulfilled the conditions of the notification and the Ld . Commr . (Appeals) order is as per law. 6. We have carefully considered the submissions and perused the records. Ld . Commr . (Appeal) in his order has found as under: I find that the notification no . 32/2004-S.T dated 03.12.2004 and 1/2006-S.T dated 01.03.2006 have allowed cond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the decision given by Principal Bench of Tribunal, New Delhi in the case of Hero Cycles Ltd. vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Gaziabad [209 (16) STR 333] in this regards. In view of the above, I accept the certificates produced for the period of April 2005 to September 2006 by the appellant, as valid documents for availment of the exemption benefit of the notifications and accordingly the demand under the impugned order is set aside. From the above it is clear that the respondent have produced certificate before the Ld . Commissioner (Appeal) and the Ld . Commr . (Appeal) has accepted the certificates produced by the respondent for the period from April, 2005 to September, 2006. The Department could not show anything cont ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
