TMI Blog2005 (9) TMI 638X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellants had utilised the services of M/s. Madras Industrial Product Corporation, Erode qua consignment agents. Two show cause notices were issued to them demanding Service Tax (with interest) and proposing penalties, one dated 21-7-2000 and the other dated 8-4-2002 covering the spells 16-7-1997 to 16-10-1998 and 17-10-1998 to 31-8-1999 respectively. Both the original authority and the first app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndings of the original and first appellate authorities and also relies on the Supreme Court s judgment in Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd. v. Union of India [2005 (182) E.L.T. 33 (S.C.)] in support of his contention that, by virtue of Section 117 of the Finance Act, 2000, recipients of services of consignment agents for the period covered by the said Section should have paid up the tax dues for such pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... received by them during the said period. The said demand was dropped by the original authority as per order dated 29-10-1999 in view of the Apex Court s judgment in Laghu Udyog Bharati (supra). This order of the original authority became final for want of challenge by the Department. Later on, however, the Department issued a show cause notice dated 21-7-2000 raising fresh demand of tax for the ab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iod, the appellants qua recipient of service of consignment agent was not liable to pay Service Tax on the amount paid for such service. None of the amendments brought to the Service Tax provisions of the Finance Act, 1994 authorised the Revenue to treat recipients of the above service as assessees for Service Tax for any period beyond 16-10-1998. After a close perusal of the relevant provisions o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
