9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (4) TMI 119X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ceived and tax liability arose, the Notification had been rescinded. – benefit of cenvat credit allowed - ST/70/2009 - A/804/WZB/Ahd/2009-CII - Dated:- 6-4-2009 - Shri B.S.V. Murthy, Member (Technical) (Final Order No. A/804/WZB/Ahd/2009-CII dt. 6.4.2009 certified on 23.4.2009 in Appeal No. ST/70/2009) Shri Vipul B. Khandhar, Consultant for Appellant Dr. Manoj Kumar Rajak, SDR for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s been confirmed against the appellant only on the ground that abatement for services rendered during the quarter ending March 2006, after Notification No.18/2005-ST was rescinded and therefore appellants could not have availed abatement as well as cenvat credit. He submits that it is the taxable event which is relevant and in this case the services were rendered during January and February, 2006 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... b) Art Leasing Ltd. 2007 (83) RLT 597 (CESTAT-Ban.) = 2007 (8) STR 162 (Tri.-Bang.) (c) Matsushita TV Audio India Ltd. 2006 (1) STR 162 (Tri.-Del.) 3. Dr. Manoj Kumar Rajak on behalf of the Revenue submits that at the time of payment of service tax, the Notification No. in existence was 01/2006-ST dated 01.3.2006 and therefore, the service tax should have been paid on the basis of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of introduction of services for commercial training, wherein a view was taken that in respect of services rendered continuously and part of services rendered prior to imposition, proportional tax shall be leviable. I also find the decisions of the Tribunal in Art Leasing case cited by the Consultant is also applicable even though I find other two decisions are not exactly applicable to the facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
