TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (2) TMI 117
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ECHNICAL MEMBER G. Natarajan for the Appellant. N.J. Kumaresh for the Respondent. ORDER 1. The lower authorities found that the M/s. Aparna Paper Processing Industry (P.) Ltd. (APPIPL) appellant in Appeal No. S/130/2007 had accounted receipt of 'Management Fee' from M/s. Creative Polypack Ltd., another concern belonging to the same group in the years 2001-02 to 2002-03. The original authority ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat they deserved relief under section 80 of the Act. He sustained the penalty of Rs. 55,000 imposed under section 78 of the Act observing that the same had not been challenged by the appellants. In the appeal filed by the assessee, the impugned demand of tax and interest as well as the penalties imposed are challenged. It is submitted that the appellants had incurred certain expenditure common wi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed demand of tax and the penalties were not sustainable. It is further submitted that the activity involved could be classified under the category 'Business Auxiliary Services' (BAS) which came on the statute book only on 1-7-2003, subsequent to the material period. The revenue has filed Appeal No. S/150/2007 seeking to vacate the following observation of the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e nature of the service rendered and if the same was taxable under 'Management Consultancy'. The learned counsel representing the assessee submitted that the services rendered was classifiable under BAS and the same was introduced in the Act on 1-7-2003. This submission is not convincingly contested. I find that the lower authorities found that the assessee had rendered taxable service without any....