2010 (1) TMI 265

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... None, for the Respondent. [judgment per D.V.shylendra kumar,J.]- The subject matter of the appeal filed under  Section 35G of the Central Excise Act,1944, by the Commissioner of Service tax, Service Tax Commissionerate, Bangalore, is as to whether the tax liability under the provisions of Finance Act,2005, in respect of the activity of the respondent-assessee namely, activity of enhancing th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... period from 10-9-2004 to 28-2-2005, is not sustainable and consequently, penalty cannot be imposed for this period. 3.  Submission of Sri Jeevan J. Neeralgi, learned standing counsel for the appellant, is that the assessee having failed to file a return for the period in ques tion, though had actually registered as a service provider, was liable to pay tax under the provisions of the Act, e .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tuted by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2004 and again by way of amendment of Finance Act, 2005 notified on 16-6-2005, it was clarified that service provided by processing of goods is excisable. When this is the state of law, nothing can be attributed to the assessee to say that there was a suppression of facts on the part: of assessee for a period prior to issue of this notification dated 1-3-2005, whe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X