2008 (11) TMI 101

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , for the Appellant. Shri Sumit Kumar, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per: P.K. Das, Member (J)]. - Heard both sides and perused the records. 2. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the records, it is seen that the appellants are providing taxable services of "Mandap Keeper". It has been alleged that during the period 2004-2005, they have charged "Service Charges" in their Bill at 5%, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... otification. It is also observed that there is no evidence placed by the appellant for claiming the abatement of 60% of the amount in their bills. The ld. Advocate submits that they had placed the bills to the lower authorities. He drew the attention of the Bench to the copies of the Bills. In our view, the matter is required to be verified in respect of the availment of the benefit of the notific .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X