2009 (11) TMI 454

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....i M. Vivekanandan, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - The impugned order dismissed the appeals filed by the appellants as per the following details on the grounds of time bar:- S. No. Appeal No. Appellant OIO No. & date Duty Period 1. 240/08 (MY)(ST) M/s. Chitra Advertising, Mysore. 21/2004 dated 20-5-2004 22100/- + Interest + Penalties   1998-....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....4. The learned Chartered Accountant for the appellants submits that the original authority had passed ex-parte orders and that the orders had never been served on them. The activity involved did not conform to any taxable ser vice defined in the Finance Act, 1994. He submits that the appellants had only rented space for affixing/making, pole advertisement and such activity became taxable under Sec....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nfirmed and penalties imposed. A copy of the show cause notice is also not available. The learned SDR is not in a position to substantiate the claim that the Order-in-Original was served on the appellants in accordance with law in the absence of evidence of affixing the orders-in-original on the doors of the assessee or the notice board of the authority concerned. He seeks time to produce the evid....