9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (8) TMI 802X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T Per G. Raghuram: Heard Shri M.S. Negi, ld. DR for the appellant/Revenue and Shri Manish Gaur, ld. Counsel for the respondent. The appeal is preferred by Revenue against the appellate order dated 10.11.2008 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Bhopal whereby the appeal of the respondent/assessee was allowed and the demand of tax, interest and penalty as visited on the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... following the judgement of the Supreme Court in CCE Vs. L.H. Sugar Factories Ltd. 2006 (3) STR 715. The Supreme Court in L.H. Sugar Factories dismissed the Revenue's appeal and confirmed the order of this Tribunal which held that the amended Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1944 (the Act) enables assessment only where an assessee is liable to service tax under Section 70 and not where liability to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of assessee in sub-section (6) of the said section. Further amendments followed in the Finance Act 2003 and a proviso was inserted in Section 68 of the Act which enjoined the recipient of goods transport operation service liable to remit service tax on the chargeable service of goods transport operation. Section 71(A) was incorporated, fortified by a non-obstante provision, enabling the recipient ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e which enables the adjudicating or an appellate authority to review the decision of this Tribunal dated 2.11.2005 whereby the respondent/assessee's appeal against the order of adjudication dated 28.2.2003 as confirmed by the appellate order dated 3.3.2005 was reversed and the assessees immunity to service tax liability, declared. As this Tribunal decision dated 2.11.2005 (in the assessee's case) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
