2009 (4) TMI 132

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....R G. Natarajan for the Appellant. N.J. Kumaresh for the Respondent. ORDER Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice President - For reasons recorded below, we waived pre-deposit of service tax of Rs. 45,6 1,282 and penalty of Rs. 200 per day up to 17-4-2006 and Rs. 200 per day or 2 per cent of the tax whichever is higher from 18-4-2006 under section 76 and Penalty of Rs. 1,000 under section 77 and ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d loaders and transporting them from M/s. SISCOL and MCRD railway sidings and ground hopper of blast furnace and sinter plant and transportation of iron ore, coke, limestone, etc., from M/s. SISCOL raw material yard to ground hopper, which was not an agreement for mere transportation so as to hold that service tax is not leviable in the light of the Tribunal's order in Bhagyanagar Services v. CCE ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sessee appeal. 4. We have perused the agreement dated 3-5-2000 between the appellants and M/s. SISCOL which prima facie is an agreement for transportation of raw materials from railway siding and MCRD railway siding to M/s. SISCOL's raw material yard and ground hopper of blast furnace and sinter plant and hence prima facie, the appellants cannot be said to have rendered Cargo Handling Service. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed to cover "production or processing of goods for or on behalf of the client" only with effect from 16-6-2005 and prior to 16-6-2005, the service tax under this heading was attracted only if goods were produced or processed on behalf of a client for a third party and during the period prior to 16-6-2005, the appellants were not carrying out any production or processing on behalf of M/s. SISCOL fo....