9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 351X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent. [Order per: S.L. Peeran, Member (J) (Oral)]. - This is a Revenue appeal arising from Order-in-Appeal No. 174/2006-C.E., dated 9-6-2006 by which the Commissioner (A) has set aside the Order-in-Original No. 16/2006 dated 14-3-2006 and has held that the assessee is eligible for refund claim of Rs. 6,76,300/-. The assessees were rendering "Steamer Agent" service and were paying Service tax on the said services. Subsequently, they filed the refund claim for the above amount on the ground that they are authorized Cargo Handling Agent at Cargo Port and Export Cargo is exempted from payment of Service tax. However, the Revenue considered their activity to be part of Steamer Agent and did not accept their contention and rejected the refund ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... carrying out the stevedoring operations. The stevedoring operations actually mean loading and unloading of cargo within the port premises. The Commissioner has interpreted that the appellant is carrying out the services within the port and he has been authorized by the port to render such services in view of the licence given to him. Therefore, he would rightly fall with in the ambit of the "Port Services". However, when we examined the issue in terms of Section 42 of the Major Port Trust Act, we find that in terms of that Section, the major port is supposed to carry out a number of activities and there is provision in terms of the said section for the port to authorize any other person to render such services after taking prior approval of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... argo, he would not be liable to Service tax even under the category of "Cargo Handling Services. In these circumstances, we do not find any merit in the order of the Commissioner and therefore, we set aside the same and allow the appeal of the appellants with consequential relief. 3.1 The learned counsel pointing out to the above findings submits that the findings are applicable to the facts of the present case. He further refers to Homa Engineering Works v. CCE, Mumbai - 2007 (7) S.T.R. 546 (Tri.-Mumbai) rendered by Mumbai Bench wherein the activity of "Port Service" has been gone into in detail and the issue has been examined. He submits that in the light of this judgment also, the activity of the assessee does not come within the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
