TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (2) TMI 94
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hay, DR, for the Appellant. Shri B.L. Narasimhan and Narendra Kumar Singhvi, Advocates, for the Respondent. ORDER The facts leading to filing of this appeal by the Revenue and cross-objection by the respondent are, in brief, as under. 1.1 The respondent are manufacturers of various gases including liquid oxygen which is sold by them in cylinders as well as in cryogenic tankers. It was fou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the respondent along with interest thereon under Section 75 and beside this, imposed penalties on them under Sections 75A, 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The service tax demand had been confirmed by the Additional Commissioner for the period from 16-8-2002 to 31-3-2007. On appeal being filed to Commissioner (Appeals) against this order, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order-in-appeal date....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ose tanks. Against this order of the Commissioner (Appeals) while the Revenue has filed the appeal, the respondent have filed cross-objection. 2. Heard both the sides. 3. Shri Jayant Sahay, the learned DR, assailed the impugned order by reiterating the grounds of appeal in the Revenue's appeal and pleaded that since the respondent, in terms of their agreement with their customer - M/s.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e tank and, therefore, no service covered under Section 65(105)(zza) had been provided. He, therefore, pleaded that there is no infirmity in the impugned order. 5. We have considered the submissions from both the sides and perused the records. 6. The undisputed facts are that the respondent are manufacturers of various gases including medical grade liquid oxygen which during the period....