CCE Vs. MILAP MARBLES (P) LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against Order -in -Appeal dated 29.9.2005 wherein the respondent's appeal was allowed.

(2.) THE issue involved in this case is regarding service tax liability fastened upon the respondents in respect of services received by them in the case of Goods Transport Operators. By a retrospective amendment vide Section 117 of Finance Act, 2000 the service receivers were required to pay service tax in respect of GTO, provided demand of service tax was raised within the time as provided by retrospective amendment. In this case the demand was raised in October, 2002 i.e. almost 2 years after amendment of the Finance Act. Adjudicating proceedings culminated in confirmation of demand of service tax and imposition of penalty. On appeal the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the Order -in -Original on the ground of time bar. Hence, this appeal by the Department.

(3.) NONE appeared for the respondents despite notice. Heard learned D.R. It is the submission of the learned D.R. that the issue involved in this case is in respect of services received by the respondents from G.T.O. By retrospective amendment in Finance Act, 2000 the Government had every intention to direct the recipient of service receiver of GTO to discharge the duty liability and it can not get be narrowed own that the recipient of service of GTO need not get covered under service tax net. Considered the submissions made learned D.R. I find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed the appeal of the respondents by observing as under: