2007 (4) TMI 151

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... demands from the year 2000-2001 to 2003-2004. The nature of services rendered on this aspect according to the appellant do not come within the ambit of CHA. It includes transportation and cargo and re-transportation of the same and such services cannot be brought within the definition of CHA Services. It is also submitted that the type of services rendered by them has been enlisted in Para 2 of the Order-in-Appeal which are as follows : (i) Freight revenue (ii) Cartage revenue (iii) MSIL/JWG Charges (iv) Due carrier (v) Documentation (vi) Break bulk fee (vii) DO fee (viii) Charges collect fee (ix) Currency adjustment fee (x)  BL. fee (xi) CFS charges and handling charges (xii) Liner charges/Examinat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ended in the Cross Objection filed by the department. The learned PR defends the order and prays for putting the appellants on terms. 3. The learned Counsel submits that in terms of the definition of CHA, the activity or air and sea transport cannot be brought within the ambit of CHA, as this is an independent activity and records are regularly maintained including the type of business carried out by them. Therefore, it is their submission that the department cannot retrospectively invoke larger period by bringing this activity under the category of CHA. It is the contention that this very issue was raised by the department in the previous proceedings by show cause notice dated 17-9-2003 and Order-in-Original No. 214/2004 dated 31-3-2004....