9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 84X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R [Order per : B. Ravichandran, Member (T)]. - The appeal is against order in revision dated 3-2-2010 of Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur. The dispute in the present case is relating to appellant's liability to pay service tax with reference to their activity of promoting sale of "Koutons" brand of readymade garments supplied by M/s. Charley Creations Pvt. Ltd., the owner of said brand. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e barred in availing the above exemption. The appellant in the present appeal contested the findings in impugned order on the ground that the original authority properly examined the scope of service and concluded that selling branded goods cannot be considered as providing service with brand name of another person. Reliance was also placed on the decision of the Tribunal in Fashion Square - 2011 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and location of their shop displaying the brand name of the garments. We find that the impugned order fell in error in appreciating the scope of Notification 6/2005. 7. In our opinion, the original authority correctly examined the issue involved. The findings of the original authority, with which we are in agreement, are reproduced below :- "8. It is clear from the above that the serv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stion with reference to many service like cargo handling, C&F, Business Auxiliary, GTA, etc., would make all such service providers out of the purview of Notifn. 6/2005-S.T., as all of them handle goods bearing the brands of other, which certainly is not the intent of the Legislature. 9. Coming to the facts of the instant case, I find that the Noticee have only handled the goods bearing the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
