9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (12) TMI 204X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his is an application filed by the appellants seeking waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of the Service Tax demanded in the impugned order. 2. The Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore has passed the impugned Order-in-Revision No. 3/2006 (Service Tax) dated 4-7-2006 in terms of Section 84(5) of the Finance Act, 1994 as amended on review of the Order-in-Original dated 28-7-2004 passed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bmits that the order passed by the original authority in 2004 was in time with ratio of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CCE, Meerut v. L.H. Sugar Factories [2005 (187) E.L.T. 5 (S.C.) = 2006 (3) S.T.R. 715 (S.C.)] on an identical issue. Therefore the impugned order passed disposing of the same Show Cause Notice confirming the demand under Section 73 of the Finance Act is not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uring 16-11-1997 to 2-6-1998. 4. Ld. SDR submits that the impugned order is sustainable and that Section 71A enacted in the Finance Act, 2003 required persons who had availed Goods Transport Operator's service during 16-11-97 to 2-6-98 to file return in Form ST 3B within a period of six months from the date Finance Act, 2003 received assent of the President on 13-5-2003. Therefore, in terms ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an equal amount as penalty on the appellants. In the case of CCE, Meerut v. L.H. Sugar Factories Ltd. (supra), the Apex Court extracted the following finding of the Tribunal in the decision impugned before their lordships and recorded their agreement of the same. "The above would show that even the amended Section 73 takes in only the case of assessees who are liable to file return under Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
