9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 885X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ORDER Per: P R Chandrasekharan: Rectification of Mistake application has been filed against final order No. A/65/14/CSTB/C-I dated 31/01/2014 on the ground that there is an error apparent on the face of the record which needs rectification. 2. The error said to have been made in the impugned order is that this Tribunal has confirmed service tax demand on the bus reservation charges collected by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt in the impugned order. The appellant was discharging service tax liability in respect of the same transaction for the amount collected under 'seat reservation charges' under 'tour operator service'. For the same tours undertaken, the appellant is also collecting bus reservation charges which were the subject matter of the impugned order and, therefore, this Tribunal has rightly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l and it was held that the appellant would be liable to discharge service tax liability under the category of 'tour operator's charges' w.e.f. 10/09/2004. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the rectification application with regard to the confirmation of service tax demand on the bus reservation charges collected by the appellant in respect of the tours undertaken for the period pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t to review of the order which is not permissible as held by the apex Court in the case of RDC Concrete (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2011 (270) ELT 625 (SC)] and ACSU Ltd. [2003 (151) ELT 481 (SC)]. In the present application, what the appellant is seeking is review of the order by re-appreciation of the arguments which is not permissible. 8. Accordingly, we find no merit in the ROM application and dismiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
