TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (5) TMI 885
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appellant. Rep. by Shri Shantanu Singh, Advocate for the respondent. ORDER Per B. Ravichandran: The Department is in appeal against the Order-in-Appeal dated 11.09.2012 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Bhopal. The appellants are engaged in providing repair, maintenance and packing services to M/s.Tafe Motors formerly known as Eicher Tractors. 2. The dispute ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....out by the appellant has been examined by the lower authorities in detail. The impugned order recorded that the activity performed by the appellant is packing of bumpers and no new product emerged after such packing. The provisions of Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act are not attracted in the present case. After detailed examination, the lower authorities held that the appellants are liable t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tested the impugned order with reference to exclusion of value of materials supplied in the taxable value of service tax. We note that the impugned order examined this issue specifically. The respondents raised bills for an amount of cost incurred in purchase of various items supplied to M/s. Eicher. The Commissioner (Appeals) examined the purchase bills and bills raised by the respondents. He rec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Section 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994, the appellant is entitled for the benefit of Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 and accordingly based on the larger bench's decision in the case of ERA Engineering Ltd. C/s. CCE, Chennai - 2006 (3) STR 429 (Tribunal - LB) hold that no penalty should be imposed on them. Broadly speaking, it is settled principle of law that the penalty is required to be ....