9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 1101X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion that the appeal filed against OIO No. 8/2011 dated 25.02.2011 would cover the issue involved in the present impugned order and hence, did not file a separate appeal against the impugned order. Held that:- by following the decision of Tribunal in their own case [2013 (11) TMI 100 - CESTAT MUMBAI] wherein the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal being satisfied with the very same reason and condoned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... approval from the higher authorities and the matter was also under consideration by the Ministry of Home Affairs, the appeal could not be filed within the stipulated time hence, the delay occurred. He further submits they were under the impression that the appeal filed against OIO No. 8/2011 dated 25.02.2011 would cover the issue involved in the present impugned order and hence, did not file a se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Section 65 (94) and 65 (105) (w) Finance Act, 1994, the appellant s providing of security agency service is covered by the above definition and hence they are liable to pay service tax on the cost of deployment of the force charges collected from the industrial undertakings belonging to the Govt. of India. 4. Heard both sides and perused the records. On going through the reliance placed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
