2010 (4) TMI 426

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Hinges for N.R. Bhaskar, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri M.A. Narayan, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Judgment per : B.V. Nagaratnana, J]. - The revenue has preferred this appeal by challenging the order dated 28.11.2006, passed in Final Order No.1993/2006 dated 28.11.2006 by raising the following substantial questions of law: (i) Whether the CESTAT was legal and correct in setting aside the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the filing of this appeal are that on 15/21.07.2003 a show-cause notice was issued to the respondent by the department by contending that the respondent is a service provider coming under the category of "mandap Keeper" and for the period from 1.2.1998 to 30.6.2002, there was no payment of service tax under tax category of mandap Keeper. That the respondent was letting out the hall for organising....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....alty and interest, the revenue has preferred this appeal. 3. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record. 4. It is noticed that CESTAT has come to a conclusion that the respondent-assessee was letting out the hall for organising social and cultural functions and was liable to pay service tax under the category ....