TMI Blog2008 (8) TMI 218X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... heir customers, has not been discharged by assessee – prima facie contention of revenue merit acceptance – application of revenue accepted - ST/464-468, 470 & 463/2008 - ST/323-329/2008-(PB) - Dated:- 18-8-2008 - S/Shri S.S. Kang, Vice-President and Rakesh Kumar, Member (T) Shri Sumit Kumar, DR, for the Appellant. S/Shri Rajvish Kumar, Madan Bhatt and Rajnish Kumar, Advocates, for the R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent submitted that the impugned order was rightly passed as the burden of duty has not been passed on to their customers. The respondent relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in the case of Magus Construction [2008 (11) S.T.R. 225 (Gau.)] submit that respondents are not liable to pay Service tax. 5. We find that Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahakari Khand Ltd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... burden on consumers and if such relief is not granted, he would suffer loss." 6. In view of the above decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, prima facie, we find merit in the contention of the Revenue, the operation of the impugned order is stayed till the pendency of appeal. However, taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and request of the respondent, the Registry is directe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
