TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (4) TMI 386
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n, AR, for the Appellant. None, for the Respondent. ORDER [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - Being aggrieved with the order passed by Commissioner, the adjudicating authority vide which he has dropped the demand, Revenue has filed the present appeal. 2. Nobody represented the Respondent. Accordingly, we have heard Sh. Sanjay Jain, the ld. DR appearing for the Revenue. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t facility under Service Tax Rules came into effect only from 1-3-2007 onwards [Rule 6(3) of Service Tax Rules, 1994]. Similar issue came up before the Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of CCE, Maysore v. Powercell Battery India Ltd. - 2010 (19) S.T.R. 400 (Tri.-Bang.) wherein the Hon'ble Tribunal has held as under : 'I have considered the submissions made at length by both sides and perused the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of taxable service and the service tax thereon to the person from whom it was received". 7. I find that the very same rule was interpreted by the coordinate bench in the cases cited by the learned Commissioner. Nothing is brought to my knowledge that an appeal has been filed and stay has been granted against these three decisions. I specifically find that the decision in the case of CCE, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....notices is, therefore, ordered to be dropped." 4. Revenue is their memo of appeal, apart from contesting the case of merits has also taken the following ground. "While dropping the demand, the adjudicating authority has relied upon the case law of CCE, Mysore v. M/s. Powercell Battery India Ltd. On verification, it is informed from the concerned Commissionerate that the said decision of....