2014 (12) TMI 826

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r the Appellant. None, for the Respondent. ORDER Heard learned Departmental Representative for the appellant/Revenue. There is no representation on behalf of the respondent/assessee. 2. Revenue preferred these appeals against the common order dated 31-10-2008 passed by the learned Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Jaipur-II allowing two appeals preferred by the respondents....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r operator service, during the relevant period. 4. In response to the application for refund, Revenue issued a show cause notice to the assessees, to explain why the claim for refund should not be credited to the consumer welfare fund on grounds of unjust enrichment. In response, assessees submitted that they were not aware that they were providing the taxable tour operator service; that t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... have been passed on to customers. The assessee's reliance on the earlier judgments of this Tribunal in M/s. Amadalavalasa Cooperative Sugars Ltd. v. CCE reported in 2007 (80) R.L.T. 35 (CESTAT) = 2007 (219) E.L.T. 526 (Tribunal) = 2009 (15) S.T.R. 501 (Tribunal); in ITC Bhadrachalam Paper Boards Ltd. v. CCE reported in 2002 (146) E.L.T. 582 (Trib.) and in Collector v. Metro Tyres Ltd. reported in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....axes leviable; but however there was no specific collection of Service Tax. Learned appellate Authority relied on the decisions of this Tribunal in M/s. Sandeep Metal Craft Ltd. v. CCE, Nagpur reported in 2008 (85) R.L.T. 845 CESTAT = 2008 (226) E.L.T. 428 (Tribunal) and in M/s. Amadalavalasa Cooperative Sugars Ltd. v. CCE reported in 2007 (80) R.L.T. 35 (CESTAT) = 2007 (219) E.L.T. 526 (Tribunal)....