TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (7) TMI 585
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....irected against Order-in-Appeal No. 91/2007, dated 30-10-2007. 2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are appellant herein was providing services under the category of 'Manpower Recruitment Agency Service' during the period September, 2003 to March, 2004. The appellant had not filed ST-3 Returns nor they have discharged the Service Tax liability. On being pointed out, the appellants d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndly Scheme' which was introduced by the Central Government would cover the issue in their favour, as they have discharged the Service Tax by 30-8-2004. He would rely upon the decision of this Bench in the case of Bhoruka Aluminium Ltd. v. CCE [2008] 15 STT 198 (Bang. - CESTAT); CCE&C v. P.M. Pol [2008] 14 STT 453 (Mum. - CESTAT), Prakash Eknath Bhoge v. CCE [2007] 9 STT 171 (Mum. - CESTAT). 4. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Services & Worker's Contractor [2007] 7 STT 13 (New Delhi - CESTAT) will apply in full force. This decision was followed by various Benches of the Tribunal. 5.1 I also find that the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of UOI v. Amit Kumar Maheswari [2009] 18 STT 284 has upheld all the decisions which have been passed holding that the 'Extraordinary Taxpayer Friendly Scheme' will be availa....