2008 (11) TMI 722

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... (A)Whether the Hon'ble CESTAT was justified in holding the demand of duty to be time barred though while amending the Act vide Section 73(1) of the Finance Act,2003, effective from 13-05- 2003, the Act made the respondent as liable to pay service tax on the services received by them from Goods Transport Operators and which gave such recipient the time limit to file returns? 2. The respo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... provision was upheld by the Apex Court in 2005 upholding the amendment made in 2003. Under these circumstances, the notice issued in May 2005 by appellant-authority came to be adjudicated and respondent-assessee was held liable to pay service tax. 4. Assessee carried the matter in appeal before Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( the CESTAT ). Vide impugned order dated 27-9-2007, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... fact or contravention of any of the provisions. In the present case, none of the contingencies can be said to exist. The contention that respondent-assessee became liable to pay service tax and file return by virtue of Amendment Act of 2003 loses sight of the fact that the transaction of providing services had taken place between 16-11-1997 and 1-6-1998. The assessee had already made payment for t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X