2011 (2) TMI 473

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppellant. Ms. Rukmani Menon, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : M.V. Ravindran, Member (J)]. -  These two appeals are filed by the Revenue against the Order-in-Appeal No. 48 & 49/2009 Service Tax dated 15-4-2009. 2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are that the respondent herein were engaged in (1) providing bulk storage facility in the warehouse for te....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rvices. The said show-cause notices were contested by the respondent/assessee before the adjudicating authority. The adjudicating authority after considering the submissions made before him held against the assessee and confirmed the demands. Aggrieved by such orders, assessee preferred appeals before the ld. Commissioner (Appeals). Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), by a common order set aside the Order....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ause notice. In this connection, it is submitted that Notification No. 6/2005 is effective from 1-3-2005 onwards whereas the period covered in the show cause notice is for the period from 2002-03 onwards. (c)     It is submitted that the finding of Commissioner (Appeals) that packaging of tea gets exemption under Section 65(76b) of the Finance Act, 1994 is not correct as pac....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rehousing of tea. 5. On careful consideration of the submissions made by both sides and perusal of the records, we find that ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the demand of service on the appellant on the category of storage & warehousing of tea by holding that the exemption under order No. 1/2002/-S.T., dated 1-8-2002 will be available as the tea is a agricultural produce. We find ....