TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (9) TMI 256
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....issioner ( AR ) For the Respondent ORDER Per : S. S. Garg The present appeal is directed against the revision order passed by the Commissioner dated 21.04.2008 whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the demand of service tax on the appellant along with interest and penalty. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants are providing Interior Decorator Service and were enga....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....judicating authority after due process passed Order-in-Original dated 30.01.2007 and dropped the demand in the show-cause notice. The adjudicating authority referred to Order-in-Original 19/2006/ST dated 20.12.2006 in the case of M/s. Woodmanns while passing the Order-in-Original. Thereafter proceedings under revisional powers of the Commissioner was initiated under Section 84(1) of the Finance Ac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....llant do not fall under the definition of "Interior Decorator Service‟ as provided under the Finance Act 1994 and thus the demand of service tax is not proper. The learned counsel referred to the various documents relating to Federal Bank and Infopark and submitted that the activities undertaken by the appellant includes supply of material and labour as can be seen from the work order and th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....i) d. Spandrel V. Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad/Kochi - 2010 (20) STR 129 (Tri.-Bang.) 4. On the other hand the learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 5. After considering the submissions of both the parties, we find that the only ground on which the Commissioner has exercised his revision is that the Woodmanns case on the basis of which the adjudicating authorit....