COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. LOTUS SHIPPING LTD.,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The three appeals are from three periods and deal with two issues; Cargo Handling Services and Port Services, said to have been carried on by the appellants. Show cause notices were issued separately for the three periods, proposing levy on both these aspects. In two periods from which C.E.Appeal Nos.16 and 17 of 2015 arise, the adjudicating authority itself dropped the proposal to levy tax on Cargo Handling Services, but affirmed that with respect to Port Services. In C.E.A.No.19 of 2015 the adjudicating authority affirmed the proposal with respect to both Cargo Handling and Port Services. The appellant was in appeal before the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT).

(2.) The Tribunal, with respect to Cargo Handling Services, in the order from which C.E Appeal 19 of 2015 arise, found in favour of the appellant, relying on the decision of the Tribunal in Lee & Mur Head Pvt.Ltd. v. CST Bangalore [2009(14) S.T.R.348 (Tri- Bang)]. The said decision had become final and the revenue was bound by the same. The Tribunal also found that in two periods, when the asessee was carrying on the very same activity the adjudicating authority itself had dropped the proposal to levy the appellant for Cargo Handling Services.

(3.) The other aspect was with respect to Port Services. The assessee had hired barges and was transporting goods from the Port to Binani Zinc Ltd. and FACT. For all these periods the assessee did not own the barges nor was the assessee an authorised operator of the Port. The assessee had hired barges from SICL, who was authorised by the Port, in which barges transporting was carried out. The revenue relied on a circular which clarified the definition of "other port services" to provide for all services within the Port without the pre-condition of there being a requirement of an authorisation. However, the said circular was prospective in application and the assessee's activities were carried on prior to it. We do not find any question of law arising from the three appeals. We hence, reject the appeals.