9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (12) TMI 504X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. ORDER One of the appeals is by the department challenging an order of the Commissioner (Appeals) setting aside the demand of service tax on Goods Transport Operators (GTO) service received by the respondents during the period 16-11-97 to 1-6-98 and vacating the penalties imposed on them by the original authority. The remaining appeal is by another assessee challenging the order of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - 2000 (2) S.T.R. 276 (S.C.) = 1999 (112) E.L.T. 365 (S.C.) wherein the provision of Service Tax Rules 1994, which made GTO service recipients liable to pay service tax was struck down as ultra vires Section 66 of the Finance Act, 1994. Subsequently, the Finance Act, 1994 was amended by the Finance Act, 2000 (which came into force on 12-5-2000) so as to make GTO service beneficiaries liable to pay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e tax from the party for the above period and imposed penalties on them. Both the parties preferred appeals. The appeal of M/s. Orient Abrasives was allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and hence the present appeal of the department. Appeal of M/s. Jayalakshmi Exports also is presently under my consideration. 4. Meanwhile, in the case of L.H. Sugar Factories Ltd. v. CCE, Meerut-II - 2006 (3) S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es Ltd. - 2005 (187) E.L.T. 5 (S.C.) = 2005-TIOL-105-SC-ST. 5. In the present appeal it is stated that, after the decision of the Apex Court in L.H. Sugar Factories (supra), the Commissioners of Central Excise, Vadodara and Chennai - III filed civil appeals in the Supreme Court against similar decisions of the Tribunal and that those appeals have been admitted. However, there is no claim tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as held in Final Order No. 825/2006 dated 30-8-2006 by the Tribunal in Appeal No. S/6/2006 [Commissioner of Central Excise v. EID Parry India Ltd. - 2006 (4) S.T.R. 585 (T)]. In the case of M/s. Jayalakshmi Exports, appellants in Appeal No. S/186/2006, there is no claim for refund. In the circumstances, the decision in the two appeals would not entitle the assessees to refund. (Dictated and pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
