TMI Blog2010 (12) TMI 264X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal rejected - E/763 of 2010-SM - - - Dated:- 3-12-2010 - Mr.M.Veeraiyan J, Present for the Appellant : Shri K.P.Singh, SDR Present for the Respondent: Shri Joy Kumar, Advocate PER: M.VEERAIYAN This is an appeal against order of the Commissioner (Appeals) No.19/ST/Appl/CHD-II/2010 dated 24.2.2010. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The respondent is a manufacturer of excisable goo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bay High Court are different from the facts of the present case. He submits that the tax liability is on the recipient with effect from 16.8.2002 by virtue of Notification NO.12/2002-ST dt. 1.8.02 issued under the Finance Act requiring the service recipient, in certain cases, payment of service tax. 5. Learned Advocate for the respondents, taking me through the decision in the case of Indian Na ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... service. He also relies on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Pashupati Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. vs. CCE, Chandigarh reported in 2009 (15)STR 274 and in the case of Fifth Avenue vs. CCE, Chennai reported in 2009 (15) STR 387. 6. I have carefully considered the submissions from both sides and perused the records and cited decisions. It has been clearly held by the Honrable Bomba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
