2009 (10) TMI 248

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Respondent. ORDER 1. Heard both sides. The revenue filed this appeal against the impugned order whereby the refund in respect of service tax paid by the respondents is allowed. The Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order allowed the refund on the ground that the service provided by the respondents is not clearing and forwarding services in the view of the Larger Bench decision of the T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rned on the ground that as the issue is before the Hon'ble High Court. It is also submitted that the respondents paid the duty under protest on 18-3-2004 and the refund application was filed on 6-12-2007 which was rightly allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals) as the respondents are not providing any clearing and forwarding services. 4. I find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mafatl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....her person's case. This view was followed by the Tribunal in the case of CCE v. Southern Asbestos Industries 2004 (175) ELT 488 (Trib. - Bang.). On the contrary, the respondents relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Central Office, Mewar Palace Org. v. Union of India [IT Appeal No. 128 of 2006, dated 13-10-2008] in their support. I note that the decision of th....