9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 1013X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arte, Advocate (AR) ORDER Per: M V Ravindran: This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. SR/271/NGP/2010 dt. 25.08.2010. 2. Revenue is aggrieved by the said order on the ground that the adjudicating authorities Order-in-Original confirming the demand has been set aside by the first appellate authority holding that the services rendered by the respondent does not fall under the cat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Ritesh Enterprises vs. Commissioner of C.Ex., Bangalore 2010 (18) STR 17 (Tri. Bang.) that no taxable services are provided. We reproduce the said findings of the first appellate authority. "Further, in the instant case, it is on record that M/s. Amitasha Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. supplies the galvanized material to the Appellant. Appellants then pick up th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o relied heavily on the Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of M/s. Ritesh Enterprises vs. CCE, Bangalore as reported in 2010 (18) STR 17 (Tri-Bang), wherein in similar circumstances, the Hon'ble Tribunal set aside the demand of service tax. I agree with the aforesaid submission. The relevant extract of the said decision is furnished below: ".... the contracts given to the appellants are for exe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llants, in their cost of production on which appropriate duty was paid at the time of its clearances from their factory. As pleaded by the appellants, under such circumstances, demanding service tax again on the amount on which Central Excise duty is being paid by M/s. Amitasha Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. is nothing but double taxation. In view of the above legal position, I hold that the above case law ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ruitment Services". This view is expressed by the Bench in the case of Seven Hills Construction vs. Commr. Of Service 2013 (31) SR 611 (Tri-Mumbai). 6. In view of the factual matrix and the authoritative to judicial pronouncement, we find that he appeal filed by the Revenue is devoid of merits and accordingly reject the appeal. Cross-objection is also disposed of in above terms. (Dictated in Cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
