TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 88X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ER (JUDICIAL) And Mr. P.V. SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Arun Kumar, Dy. Commissioner/AR for the Appellant. Shri Y. Sreenivasa Reddy, Advocate for the Respondent. ORDER Per: Mr. M.V. Ravindran 1. These two appeals are directed against Orders-in-Appeal Nos. 34/2009(H-III)ST, dated 31.07.2009 and 35/2009(H-III)ST, dated 31.07.2009. Since both the appeals arise common issue, they are being disposed of by a common order. 2. These appeals are filed by Revenue against the Orders-in-Appeal on the ground that the first appellate authority has erred in holding that the respondents herein are not taxable under the category of Cargo Handling Service for the period 1.10.2002 to 30.09.2007. It was the case of the Re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and handling equipment but is also responsible for proper execution of the work like loading and unloading etc. and it is his further submission that the activity undertaken by the appellant has to be held as cargo handling service as the activities are nothing but handling of cargo. He relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Gajanand Agarwal vs. CCE, Bhubaneswar [2009(13) S.T.R. 138 (Tri.-Kolkata)] and the unreported judgment of Hon ble High Court of Allahabad in the writ petition filed by M/s Star Paper Mills Limited and decided on 07.01.2004 for the submission that the activities undertaken by the appellant would fall under cargo handling service. 4. Ld. Counsel submits that the first appellate authority was correct i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ices rendered within the factory premises of ITC Limited. The services which are rendered by the appellant are not disputed and it is also not disputed that the said services are rendered within the factory premises. The first appellate authority in the impugned order has relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of SN Uppar Co. and few other decisions on similar issue to hold that the Order-in- Original confirming the demands raised is unsustainable. We concur with the views and the findings of the first appellate authority. The first appellate authority has correctly followed the law laid down by various decisions of the Tribunal and has also held that the demand is hit by limitation. We find that there is a recent judgment o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
