(1.) THIS appeal arises from OIA No. 178/2004 -ST dated 30.11.2004 by which the Service Tax has been confirmed on the services of Goods Transport Operators during the period 16.07.1997 to 01.06.1998. The appellant's contention was that during the period in question, the Service Tax was not leviable on the GTOs. The same was brought into the Service Tax net by Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 by an amendment in the year 2000. The Show Cause Notice has been issued subsequent to the amendment for the period prior to the amendment date. The introduction of GTO services by the amendment does not have retrospective effect and confirmation of Service Tax is not sustainable is the submission of the appellant. In this regard, the learned Counsel relies on the ruling rendered by the President's Bench in the case of L.H. Sugar Factories Ltd. v. CCE, Meerut -II which is based on Laghu Udyog Bharati v. Union of India 1998 (112) ELT 365(SC). He submits that both these rulings have been applied by this Bench in the case of CC v. Gemini Steel Tubes Ltd. and Anr. Final Order Nos. 1900 and 1901/2005 dated 14.11.2005. All the three judgments have been referred in the case of Sree Rayalaseema Dutch Kassenbouw Ltd. 2006 (77) RLT 300 (CESTAT -Ban.). He submits that the issue is covered by these judgments and the confirmation of Service Tax on GTO services should be set aside.
(2.) THE learned JDR reiterates the confirmation of demand.
(3.) ON a careful consideration, we notice that the Show Cause Notice in the present case has been issued subsequent to the amendment brought to the Finance Act with regard to the GTO services. The Show Cause Notice was required to have been issued prior to the amendment as held in all the judgments cited supra. In similar cases, the demands have been set aside on these grounds. Therefore, respectfully following the ratio of the cited judgments, we set aside the impugned order by allowing the appeal with consequential relief, if any.