2005 (4) TMI 368

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The brief facts of the case are that M/s. Gujarat Goldcoin Ceramics Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the service receiver) manufactures ceramic tiles. They entered into contract dated 2-10-1997 with an Italian company for technical assistance/erection/commissioning of the plant and machinery. They received technical assistance for erection and for commissioning. The Supdt. of Central Excise is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the case of M/s. DGP Windsor India Ltd. v. CCE, Mumbai-III [Order No. A/593/WZB/2004/C-II, dated 19-7-2004], the Tribunal had held that the charges for erection, installation and commissioning were not covered under the category of Consulting Engineering Services leviable for the period in dispute which was prior to July, 2003. In the present case, the period covered is 1-10-1998 to 13-9-2001. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mpany for holding that the liability to pay service tax vests with the Indian Company is also not acceptable. For both these reasons, the demand of service tax and penalties are not sustainable and accordingly, I set aside the same and allow the appeal of the service receiver. On the same basis, the appeal of the Revenue for enhancement of the penalty is rejected. (Dictated in Court) - - TaxT .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X