9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (7) TMI 471X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri R. Nagar, SDR, for the Appellant. [Order per : S.K. Gaule, Member (T)]. - Revenue is in appeal against the order in appeal No. 135/2006/92(RAJ)/Commr.(A)/DK/Raj, dt. 7-3-06 whereby Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the lower adjudicating authority's order demanding service tax and imposing penalty on the respondent. The respondents are neither present nor represented. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bus-Operators Assn. of T.N. v. UOI & Others reported in 2006 (2) S.T.R. 411 (Mad.) = 2001 (134) E.L.T. 618 (Mad.) held that the service provided by the respondent did not fall within the definition of tour operator and accordingly set aside the lower adjudicating authority order. Aggrieved, Revenue filed this appeal. 3. The contention of the appellant is that the Commissioner (Appeals) has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s v. CCE, Chennai reported in 2006 (3) S.T.R. 151 (Mad.) = 2004 (163) E.L.T. 409 (Mad.). 4. We find that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) basing his findings on definitions of tour, tourist vehicle and tour operator which stood at the material time and certificate issued by Regional Transport Authority, Rajkot reached to the conclusion that the vehicles used by respondent were out of purvi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h as the tourist vehicle operated by the respondent will not be out of the purview of the said definition. The reservation is without any evidence and it neither challenge the veracity or the contents of the certificate. As regard the other grievance of the appellant that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has not taken into consideration the fact that the lower adjudicating authority has himself ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
