9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 1274X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hri Pawan Kumar Singh (Supdt.) AR for Respondent ORDER Per: Anil G. Shakkarwar The present appeal is arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.289-ST/APPL/KNP/2012 dated 25/10/2012 passed by Commissioner (Appeals), Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Kanpur. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants were engaged in manufacture of biscuits. Appellants were also registered under Servic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arguments and did not interfere with the order passed by the Original Authority confirming the demand and imposing penalty under Section 78 of Finance Act, 1994. However, since penalty under said Section 78 was imposed, learned Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the penalty imposed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. Aggrieved by the said order appellant is before this Tribunal. 3. Heard th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssions from both the sides and on perusal of records, we find that the payments were made to individual labourers and there was no issue of any consignment note in whatever form. Therefore, we do not find the said transaction to be covered by GTA Service. 6. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal. Appellant shall be entitled for consequential relief, as per law. (Dictat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
