TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (6) TMI 188
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... REPRESENTED BY: Shri J.H. Motwani, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri K. Lal, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per: D.N. Panda, Member (J)]. - ST- 59/03-Mum : The ld. Counsel submits that this case was heard alongwith the case of M/s. DGP Windsor India Ltd. (Appeal No. ST/37/03/Mum.) on 19-7-2004. From the order passed in that case, it is clear that the present appellant's case was also broug....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ioning" of the machinery and the said charges have been paid by his client and that was the subject matter of the adjudication. This consideration was liable to tax in accordance with law which came into force from 1-7-03. But the period involved in the case of the appellant is from July, 1997 to Sept. 2001. Therefore there shall not be taxability. His further submission is that "commissioning and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the activity. We have examined the exigibility of tax in respect of commissioning and installation charges coming out from page 40 of the appeal folder which explained the contract that was entered into between the parties. Taking into consideration the above and also about the effective date of the commissioning and installation charges as 1-7-03, the appeal of the appellant succeeds and we allow....