9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 94X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the tank and as such the same was in the custody or control of the hospital. Therefore, the respondent cannot be treated as storage or warehouse keeper in respect of the oxygen stored in the tank installed in the premises of KHRC. In view of this, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. The Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. - Decided against Revenue. - ST/813/2008 and Cross Objection No. ST/CO/50/2009 - Final Order No. ST/A/52617/2014-CU(DB) - Dated:- 22-5-2014 - Justice G. Raghuram, President and Shri Rakesh Kumar, Member (T) Shri Jayant Sahay, DR, for the Appellant. Shri B.L. Narasimhan and Narendra Kumar Singhvi, Advocates, for the Respondent. ORDER The facts leading to filing of this appeal by the Reve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lowed the appeal on the ground that the service provided by the respondent to KHRC is not storage or warehousing service as the appellant in respect of the liquid oxygen stored in the premises of KHRC cannot be said to be warehouse keeper. The Commissioner (Appeals) in this also observed that the respondent had supplied the cryogenic storage tank to KHRC for installation in their premises and the installation of the tank was to be done by KHRC. She also observed that the storage tanks which are cryogenic storage tanks for the storage of liquid oxygen had been purchased from the respondent by KHRC and, therefore, it is totally wrong to treat the respondent as warehouse keeper in respect of the liquid oxygen stored in those tanks. Against t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ses including medical grade liquid oxygen which during the period of dispute was supplied to KHRC, Noida. There is also no dispute the respondent had also supplied storage tank to KHRC and in terms of their agreement with the hospital were responsible for its maintenance of the tank and its regular inspection as per the provisions of Explosives Act. The oxygen gas sold by the respondent to KHRC was being stored in the tank and as such the same was in the custody or control of the hospital. Therefore, the respondent cannot be treated as storage or warehouse keeper in respect of the oxygen stored in the tank installed in the premises of KHRC. In view of this, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. The Revenue s appeal is dismisse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
