2018 (5) TMI 1471

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....echnical) Shri R. Subramaniam, AC (AR) for the Appellant Ms. R. Charulatha, Advocate for the Respondent ORDER Per Bench The above appeal is filed by the department aggrieved by the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) who set aside the demand, interest and penalties. 2. Brief facts are that the respondents are engaged in providing air travel agent service, air travel agent, ren....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cause notice was issued demanding differential service tax and also for imposing penalty. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand along with interest and imposed penalty. In appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) dropped the entire demand. Hence department is now before the Tribunal. 3. The ld. AR Shri R. Subramaniam reiterated the grounds of appeal. 4. On behalf of the respondent, ld. couns....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lment of CEVAT credit being satisfied. In respect of the issue of denying benefit of Notification 4/2004, she submitted that this Tribunal vide Final Order No. 40964/2018 dated 28.3.2018 in the case of Vision Pro Event Management had decided the issue in favour of the assessee. Similar view was taken by the Tribunal in the case of Maersk India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai vid....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Minerals Water (P) Ltd. (supra) has discussed the issue as under:- "13. On the facts of the case we are of the opinion that this petition deserves to be allowed. The facts of the case show that the Modvat credit taken on the inputs was reversed by the petitioner. Since the reversal of Modvat credit has been done by the petitioner hence in our opinion it has to be treated that no credit wa....