2008 (11) TMI 59

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dvocate for the appellant; Shri L.B. Yadav, Departmental Representative, for the Revenue, [Order per P.K. Das, Member (Judicial)] - Common issue is involved in these appeals and, therefore, all are being taken up together for disposal. 2. The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that Appellant No.1 is engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods for automobile industry. Appellant No....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g a speaking order. Appellants challenged Order-in-Appeal dated 21.2.2006 before the Tribunal, being Appeal No.138-139 of 2006, which are being taken up for hearing for disposal. 3. During the pendency of the above appeals before the Tribunal, the adjudicating authority passed de novo adjudication order dated 26.12.2006 and confirmed the demand of tax and penalties as earlier adjudication order....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ervice of foreign company are not liable to service tax prior to 1.1.2005. Learned Advocate further submits that the demand of service tax on both the appellants are not sustainable. 5. We find that there is a factual dispute on the nature of service, which were not examined by the adjudicating authority.  Learned Advocate made various submissions on this issue. Therefore, the impugned ord....