2008 (88) RLT 789 (SC) (IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) Present : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashok Bhan Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.S. Sirpurkar CCE, NEW DELHI Versus SUPERIOR PRODUCTS (Civil Appeal Nos. 235-238/2003*) Dated 28.8.2008 Small scale exemption Notification No. 16/97-CE dt. 1.4.1997, No. 8/98CE dt. 2.6.1998 and No. 9/98-CE dt. 2.6.1998 - Clubbing of clearances - two units had separate capital, premises, machinery, labour and carried out separate operations - to be treated as separate units though having common directors and one person looking after affairs of both units - clearances not to be clubbed. Assessable value Section 4 of CEA, 1944 - Packing charges - not to be included when packing is supplied free by buyer - Revenue's appeals dismissed. 2008 (88) RLT 791 (SC) (IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) Present : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashok Bhan Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.S. Sirpurkar

CC & CE, HYDERABAD Versus PARSIN CHEMICALS LTD. (Civil Appeal Nos. 3301-3312/2003* with Criminal Appeal No. 109/2003) Dated 26.8.2008) Demand and Penalty 100% EOU - DTA clearance - Rate of duty - Section 3, 11A and 11AC of CEA, 1944 - goods cleared without following prescribed procedure - case covered by Supreme Court's judgement - duty already paid not to be refunded as respondent's counsel submits that respondent would not claim its refund - penalty set aside. (Paras 5,6 & 8) Prosecution Effect of CESTAT's order - CESTAT order setting aside penalty upheld by Supreme Court - criminal proceedings in same case quashed. (Para 14) 2008 (88) RLT 793 (SC) (IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) Present : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashok Bhan Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.M. Panchal CCE & CUSTOMS Versus MDS SWITCHGEAR LTD.

(Civil Appeal Nos. 3426-3427/2002*) Dated 7.8.2008 Modvat credit Demand - Rule 57I of C.Ex. Rules, 1944 - input supplier paid duty on inflated value, which was accepted by Deptt. - Revenue can not deny credit of higher duty paid - appeals dismissed. (Paras 7 & 9) 2008 (88) RLT 795 (SC) (IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) Present : Hon'ble Dr. Justice Arijit Pasayat Hon'ble Dr. Justice Mukundakam Sharma

SANDUR MICRO CIRCUITS LTD. Versus CCE, BELGAUM (Civil Appeal No. 7177/2005* with C.A. Nos. 5024-5025/2008 and 6897/2005) Dated 13.8.2008 Exemption Central Excise - Notification No. 2/95-CE dt. 4.1.1995 - 100% EOU - DTA clearance - Board's circular - Effect - circular can not take away effect of statutorily issued notification - appeals dismissed. (Para 5) 2008 (88) RLT 796 (SC) (IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) Present : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashok Bhan Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.M. Panchal CCE, TAMIL NADU Versus SOUTHERN STRUCTURALS LTD. (Civil Appeal No. 180/2003*) Dated 6.8.2008 Assessable value Section 4 of CEA, 1944 - Notional interest - on advances did not affect contract price - not to be added. (Para 22) Limitation Demand - Section 11A of CEA, 1944 - extended time limit not invokable as Deptt. was aware of interest free advance received by respondents. (Paras 21 & 22) 2008 (88) RLT 802 (Uttarakhand) (IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL) Present : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prafulla C. Pant Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dharam Veer CC & CE, MEERUT-II Versus INDIA GLYCOLS LTD. (Central Excise Appeal No. 6/2006) Dated 12.8.2008

Modvat credit on capital goods Rule 57Q of C.Ex. Rules, 1944 - M.S. angles - used for joining connecting pipes used in manufacturing of goods - entitled to credit. (Paras 7 & 8) Modvat credit on capital goods Rule 57Q of C.Ex. Rules, 1944 - Cement and Bitumen - no evidence that the same were used for fixing plant and machinery credit not admissible if used in construction of quarters or boundary wall - credit not admissible. (Paras 7 & 8) 2008 (88) RLT 806 (AP) (IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD) Present : Hon'ble Mrs. Justice T. Meena Kumari Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ramesh Ranganathan TIRUMALA SEUNG HAN TEXTILES LTD. Versus CCE, HYDERABAD-III (Writ Petition No. 13421/2008) Dated 26.6.2008 Limitation -- Appeal - Rectification of mistake - Section 35C of CEA, 1944 - period during which ROM application has been pending in CESTAT, is to be excluded for computing period of limitation laid down in Section 35C(2) - case remanded. (Paras 6 & 7) 2008 (88) RLT 808 (Raj.) (IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR) Present : Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.P. Gupta Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishan Swaroop Chaudhari HINDUSTAN ZINC LTD. Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF C.EX., UDAIPUR (Central Excise Appeal No. 67/2006) Dated 20.5.2008 Cenvat credit Rule 2(g) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002 - Cement - used for constructing foundation for plant and machinery - not eligible input - appeal dismissed. (Para 3) 2008 (88) RLT 809 (CESTAT-LB) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad) Present : Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.N. Jha, President Smt. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) Shri B.S.V. Murthy, Member (Technical) CADILA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.

Versus CCE, AHMEDABAD-II (Misc. Order No. M/1074/WZB/Ahd/2008-CII dt. 26.9.2008 certified on 1.10.2008 in Appeal No. E/1336/2007) Assessable value Section 4 and 4A of CEA, 1944 - Medicament Physician's samples - not sold - MRP is not required to be marked on them - value to be determined under Section 4(1)(b) and not Section 4A. (Paras 3 & 21) Assessable value Section 4 of CEA, 1944 - Medicament - Physician's sample - Rule 4 and 8 of C.Ex. Valuation (DPEG) Rules, 2000 - value to be determined under Rule 4 and not Rule 8 (Majority view). (Paras 29,30,31 & 33) 2008 (88) RLT 821 (CESTAT-Che.) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai) Present : Shri P. Karthikeyan, Member (Technical) ARJAY APPAREL INDUSTRIES LTD. Versus CCE, COIMBATORE (Final Order No. 660/2008 dt. 4.7.2008 certified on 10.7.2008 in Appeal No. E/606/2005/MAS) Monthly payment of duty Cenvat credit - Interest and Penalty - Rule 3(3) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002 - Rule 8(3) of C.Ex. Rules, 2002 - duty on goods removed in August, 2003, was paid on 30.9.2003 by utilising cenvat credit earned in September, 2003 - payment is in order - need not be paid from PLA - interest and penalty set aside - appeal allowed. (Para 3) 2008 (88) RLT 823 (CESTAT-Mum.) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai) Present : Shri M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) Shri K.K. Agarwal, Member (Technical)

INCAB INDUSTRIES LTD. Versus CCE (APPEALS), PUNE-III (Final Order No. A/626/WZB/2008-CII/EB dt. 23.7.2008 certified on 30.7.2008 in Appeal No. E/1879/2003-Mum.) Assessable value Section 4 of CEA, 1944 - Transaction value - 60% production sold to one customer at reduced price vis-a-vis price charged from other customers - not a case of special discount on price list but of reduced price whose

genuineness is not doubted - transaction value to be accepted - appeal allowed. (Para 6) 2008 (88) RLT 825 (CESTAT-Che.) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai) Present : Shri P.G. Chacko, Member (Judicial) Shri P. Karthikeyan, Member (Technical) CCE, TRICHY Versus LARSEN & TOUBRO LIMITED (Final Order No. 609/2008 dt. 24.6.2008 certified on 27.6.2008 in Appeal No. E/583/2001) Exemption Central Excise - Notification No. 205/88-CE dt. 25.5.1988 Towers - parts of wind mills - cleared in SKD/CKD condition and used at site in erecting wind mills - not entitled to benefit of notification as not captively used in manufacture of wind mills - Revenues appeal allowed. (Paras 4 & 6) 2008 (88) RLT 827 (CESTAT-Mum.) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai) Present : Shri K.K. Agarwal, Member (Technical)

SWEET TRADE Versus CCE, MUMBAI-IV (Final Order No. A/574/WZB/2008-CIII/SMB dt. 18.7.2008 certified on 24.7.2008 in Appeal No. E/2058/2006-Mum.) Refund Unjust enrichment - Section 11B of CEA, 1944 - duty was forcibly recovered on certain alleged sales which were not established subsequently - duty shown as deposit in balance sheet and so certified by chartered accountant - refund not hit by provisions of unjust enrichment - appeal allowed. (Para 4) 2008 (88) RLT 829 (CESTAT-Ban.) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore) Present : Dr. S.L. Peeran, Member (Judicial) Shri T.K. Jayaraman, Member (Technical) NAVABHARAT VENTURES LTD. Versus CCE, VISAKHAPATNAM (Final Order No. 893/2008 dt. 28.7.2008 certified on 6.8.2008 in Appeal No. E/774/2007) Cenvat credit Rule 6 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 - Bio-earth/Biocompost - manufactured by using spent wash (residual water) which arose during

manufacture of rectified spirit from molasses - rectified spirit was not liable to duty - credit on molasses was reversed - 8% or 10% amount not payable on bio earth/bio compost - appeal allowed. (Para 6) 2008 (88) RLT 833 (CESTAT-Mum.) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai) Present : Shri M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) Shri K.K. Agarwal, Member (Technical)

CCE, MUMBAI-V Versus SHAKTI INDUSTRIES AND VICE VERSA (Final Order Nos. A/664-666/WZB/2008-CII/EB dt. 10.7.2008 certified on 6.8.2008 in E/CO/376/2003 and Appeal Nos. E/1871-1872/2003) Small scale exemption Notification No. 9/2000-CE dt. 1.3.2000 - Clubbing of clearances - Mumbai unit did not declare existence of Goa unit while claiming exemption - Goa unit being in rural area is fully exempt from duty under notification - non- declaration of Goa unit not to result in clubbing of clearances of exempted goods of Goa unit with clearances of Mumbai unit. (Paras 7 & 8) 2008 (88) RLT 835 (CESTAT-Che.) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai) Present : Shri P. Karthikeyan, Member (Technical) FUTURA FIBRES Versus CCE, CHENNAI (Final Order No. 744/2008 dt. 22.7.2008 certified on 25.7.2008 in Appeal No. E/302/2006/MAS) Refund PLA balance - Section 11B of CEA, 1944 - on exemption from Additional Excise duty, unutilised balance of AED to be refunded. (Para 4) Refund Cenvat credit - Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002 - on exemption from Additional Excise duty to final product, unutilised input credit of AED is not to be refunded as the rule does not provide for it. (Para 4.1) 2008 (88) RLT 837 (CESTAT-Che.) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai) Present : Shri P. Karthikeyan, Member (Technical) S.V.G. EXPORTS (P) LTD.

Versus CCE, CHENNAI-III (Final Order Nos. 596-597/2008 dt. 23.6.2008 certified on 26.6.2008 in Appeal Nos. E/207 & 209/2006) Remission of duty Rule 21 of C.Ex. Rules, 2002 - goods damaged after removal from factory for export - Rule 21 is not attracted - no provision for remission of duty on goods destroyed outside factory - appeals dismissed. (Para 4) 2008 (88) RLT 839 (CESTAT-Che.) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai) Present : Shri P.G. Chacko, Member (Judicial) Shri P. Karthikeyan, Member (Technical)

ARUN SMELTERS LTD. Versus CCE, CHENNAI (Final Order Nos. 614-615/2008 dt. 24.6.2008 certified on 27.6.2008 in Appeal Nos. E/632/2001 and E/644/2002) CENVAT Credit Utilisation - Compounded levy - Ingots and Billets of non-alloy steel - Notification No. 5/94-CE(NT) dt. 1.3.1994 and No. 21/99-CE(NT) dt. 28.2.1999 - after revokation of compounded levy scheme, appellants took input credit after 1.4.2000 - such credit could not be utilised for paying demand of compounded levy for earlier period - appellants to pay duty in cash and take back credit in cenvat account. (Paras 2,3 & 4) Compounded levy Penalty - Rule 96ZO (3) of C.Ex. Rules, 1944 - reduced as prescribed penalty is not mandatorily to be imposed. (Para 5) Compounded levy Interest - Rule 96ZO (3) of C.Ex. Rules, 1944 - payable for delay in depositing compounded levy. (Para 6) 2008 (88) RLT 842 (CESTAT-Mum.) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai) Present : Shri A.K. Srivastava, Member (Technical)

CCE, PUNE-I Versus VECTOR GASKETS INDIA LTD. & ORS. (Misc. Order Nos. M/147-149/WZB/2008-CI/SMB dt. 4.7.2008 certified on 10.7.2008 in Application Nos. E/ROM/1033-35/2008 in Appeal Nos. E/1240,1235 & 1267/2007-Mum.) Appeal Rectification of mistake - Section 35C of CEA, 1944 - failure on part of Revenue to make inquiries, non-citing of existing judgement and failure to consider it before passing final order - not errors apparent on record - ROM applications dismissed. (Paras 3,4 & 5)

2008 (88) RLT 844 (CESTAT-Ahmd.) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad) Present : Shri B.S.V. Murthy, Member (Technical) SHREEJI COLOURCHEM INDUSTRIES Versus CCE, VADODARA-I (Final Order No. A/1353/WZB/Ahd/2008-CII dt. 17.7.2008 in Appeal No. E/1194/2007) Interest Refund - Section 11BB of CEA, 1944 - Pre-deposit - in case of refund of deposit of duty made before issue of show cause notice and pre -deposit of penalty made during pendency of appeal, interest is payable after 3 months from date of filing of refund application pursuant t favourable appellate order - appeal o dismissed. (Paras 6,9, 10 & 12) 2008 (88) RLT 849 (CESTAT-Ahmd.) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad) Present : Smt. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) Shri B.S.V. Murthy, Member (Technical)

METAL GEMS & ORS. Versus CCE, DAMAN (Final Order Nos. A/1485-1509/WZB/Ahd/2008-CII and Stay Order Nos. S/675699/WZB/Ahd/2008-CII dt. 1.8.2008 certified on 5.8.2008 in Application No. E/Stay/286299 and 302-312/2008 and Appeal Nos. E/286-299, 302,303 and 309-315/2008) Pre-deposit Section 129E of Customs Act, 1962 - waived as case is being remanded for fresh decision after allowing cross examination of witnesses. (Para 8) Natural justice Cross examination - of witnesses whose statements are relied upon, is not allowed by adjudicating authority - violative of principles of natural justice - case remanded. (Para 8) 2008 (88) RLT 853 (CESTAT-Che.) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai) Present : Shri P.G. Chacko, Member (Judicial) Shri P. Karthikeyan, Member (Technical)

LAKSHMI MACHINES WORKS LTD. Versus CC, TRICHY & ANR. (Final Order Nos. 757-759/2008 dt. 23.7.2008 certified on 28.7.2008 in Appeal Nos. C/243,233/2004 and C/118/2003) Warehousing period Interest - Section 61 of Customs Act, 1962 warehousing period in force on date of deposit of goods in warehouse and not period

reduced subsequently to apply - interest payable for period beyond applicable warehousing period if goods re mained in warehouse. (Para 2) Limitation Refund - Interest - Warehoused goods - Section 27 and 61(2) of Customs Act, 1962 - refund claim for interest paid in excess on warehoused goods is not governed by limitation laid down in Section 27 - claim filed after six months but before one year from date of payment is admissible in absence of specific provision for limitation - appeal allowed. (Para 3) 2008 (88) RLT 855 (CESTAT-Del.) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi) Present : Shri S.S. Kang, Vice President Shri Rakesh Kumar, Member (Technical)

MODIPON LTD. Versus CC, ICD, TKD, NEW DELHI (Final Order No. 305/2008-Cus. dt. 12.8.2008 certified on 27.8.2008 in Appeal No. C/399/2008) Shipping bill Conversion - Section 149 of Customs Act, 1962 - conversion of shipping bills from DEEC scheme to DEPB scheme is sought - advance licences surrendered to DGFT - if conditions (b) to (e) of Boards circular dt. 16.1.2004 which are in accordance with p rovisions of Section 149 are fullfilled, conversion of shipping bill from one export scheme to another is permissible, though there was no dispute in terms of condition (a) of circular - case remanded. (Para 4) 2008 (88) RLT 860 (CESTAT-Che.) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai) Present : Shri P.G. Chacko, Member (Judicial) Shri P. Karthikeyan, Member (Technical)

MITHRAN & ORS. Versus CC, COIMBATORE (Final Order Nos. 749-752/2008 and Stay Order Nos. S/647-650/2008 dt. 23.7.2008 certified on 28.7.2008 in Application Nos. C/Stay/151,117,124 & 170/2008 and Appeal Nos. C/194,155,162 & 218/2008) Penalty Section 114 of Customs Act, 1962 - case against exporter and his agent is yet to be adjudicated - imposition of penalties on CHA and others for abetting the offence is pre -mature - penalties set aside - appeals allowed. (Para 3) 2008 (88) RLT 861 (CESTAT-Ban.) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore)

Present :

Dr. S.L. Peeran, Member (Judicial) Shri T.K. Jayaraman, Member (Technical)

NARAYAN NAMBIAR MELOTH Versus CC, COCHIN AND CC, COCHIN Versus RAZAK MAMMU HAJI & ORS. (Final Order Nos. 771-782/2008 and Misc. Order Nos. M/246 to 256/2008 dt. 11.7.2008 certified on 21.7.2008 in C/CO/151,94-96, 87-90/2008 and Appeal Nos. C/748-754/2007 & C/35, 272-275/2008) Import Car - EXIM Policy, 2004-2009 - Transfer of Residence - cars imported on transfer of residence, confiscated and redemption fine and penalty imposed for importing cars without licence - on payment of fine and penalty, condition of no sale after importation is no longer attracted - Revenues appeals dismissed. (Para 6) Assessable value Section 14 of Customs Act, 1962 - Rule 4 of Customs Valuation (DPIG) Rules, 1988 - Car (second hand) - Transaction value Refurbishing charges - incurred before importation need not be added when transaction value is to be accepted - Revenues appeals dismissed. (Para 8) Assessable value Section 14 of Customs Act, 1962 - Rule 4 of Customs Valuation (DPIG) Rules, 1988 - Car (second hand) - Transaction value - importer paid 55000 dirham to dealer but claimed 6,50,000 yen as price of car - 55000 dirham to be adopted. (Para 9) Penalty and Redemption fine Section 112 and 125 of Customs Act, 1962 Car (second hand) - EXIM Policy required use of car for one year and car to be right hand drive - violation of EXIM Policys condition of one year use can not be overlooked on ground that use of right hand d rive car was not allowed in country of shipment - fine and penalty upheld - assessees appeal dismissed. (Para 10) 2008 (88) RLT 867 (CESTAT-Del.) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi) Present : Honble Mr. Justice S.N. Jha, President Shri M. Veeraiyan, Member (Technical)

SALORA FLORITECH P. LTD. Versus CC, NOIDA (Final Order No. 330/2008-Cus. dt. 2.9.2008 certified on 17.9.2008 in Appeal No. C/16/2005)

Penalty Section 112 of Customs Act, 1962 - 100% EOU - non-fulfilment of export obligation has been for reasons beyond the control of appellants - there is no misuse or diversion of duty free goods and entire production has been exported penalty not warranted. (Paras 6.2 & 7 (a)) Exemption Customs - Notification No. 126/94-Cus. - 100% EOU - on nonfulfilment of full export obligation, duty becomes payable on depreciated value of capital goods but not in proportion to shortfall in fulfilment of export obligation on debonding - depreciation to be allowed till date by which export obligation was to be fulfilled - in case of inputs not used or diverted, full duty is payable. (Paras 6.4, 6.6, 6.7, 6.8 & 7 (b) & (c)) Limitation Demand - 100% EOU - duty demand on account of nonfulfilment of full export obligation, raised after one year from expiry of export obligation period, is not time barred as obligation to fulfil export obligation is a continuing process. (Para 6.9) 2008 (88) RLT 873 (CESTAT-Ahmd.) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad) Present : Smt. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) Shri B.S.V. Murthy, Member (Technical)

CENTURY LAMINATING CO. LTD. & ANR. Versus CC, KANDLA (Final Order Nos. A/1084-1085/WZB/Ahd/2008-CII dt. 2.5.2008 certified on 28.5.2008 in Appeal Nos. C/745-746/2004) Anti-dumping duty Notification No. 79/2002-Cus. dt. 13.8.2002 - Phenol of Russian origin - shipped from USA but transshipped from Finland, an E.U. country - duty as per Notification which applied to E.U. countries, is not leviable as the goods are of Russian origin - appeal allowed. (Paras 1,2 & 3) 2008 (88) RLT 875 (CESTAT-Del.) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi) Present : Honble Mr. Justice S.N. Jha, President Shri M. Veeraiyan, Member (Technical)

JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD. Versus CCE, RAIPUR (Final Order Nos. 188-189/2008-ST dt. 22.4.2008 certified on 18.8.2008 in Appeal Nos. ST/567/2006 and ST/161/2007) Service Tax Cenvat credit - Rule 2(r) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002 credit of service tax paid by appellants as deemed service provider on services received by them, is admissible. (Para 5.2)

Service Tax Cenvat credit - credit of service tax paid on input service is not deniable when service tax is paid on deemed output service at the instance of Department. (Para 5.3) Service Tax Cenvat credit - Rule 2 (p) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002 appellants paid service tax on input service received from abroad as deemed output service - such credit can be utilised for paying service tax without any time limit on output service provided by appellants after taking registration for output service. (Para 5.4) Service Tax Education cess - not payable for period prior to 10.9.2004 appeals allowed. (Para 5.5) 2008 (88) RLT 879 (CESTAT-Del.) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi) Present : Shri S.S. Kang, Vice President Shri Rakesh Kumar, Member (Technical)

NATIONAL PRODUCTIVITY COUNCIL Versus CCE, CHANDIGARH (Final Order No. 186/2008-ST dt. 1.8.2008 certified on 18.8.2008 in Application No. ST/Misc./405/2008 and Appeal No. ST/249/2006) Service Tax Scientific or technical consultancy service - Management consultancy service - Section 65 of Finance Act, 1994 - main thrust of appellants activity is conducting scientific research, and tendering advice undertaking technical study related to productivity - projects undertaken by appellants involved giving scientific or technical advice in various disciplines of science or technology and for optimizing efficiency and output of industry - such activity is more appropriately covered by scientific or technical consultancy service and not management consultancy service - appeal allowed. (Paras 4,4.1,4.2, 4.3 & 4.4) 2008 (88) RLT 883 (CESTAT-Del.) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi) Present : Shri S.S. Kang, Vice President Shri Rakesh Kumar, Member (Technical)

TOURAIDS (I) TRAVEL SERVICES Versus CCE, KANPUR (Final Order No. 219/2008-ST and Stay Order No. S/322/2008-ST dt. 25.8.2008 certified on 4.9.2008 in Application No. ST/Stay/1020/2008 and Appeal No. ST/321/2008) Service Tax Tour operators service - Taxable value - Section 65 and 67 of Finance Act, 1994 - Supplementary services, namely, Guide service, Monument visit service, Porter service, Food service, General assistance service etc. - provided by

appellants, are covered by tour operators service w.e.f. 10.9.2004 - charges for such supplementary services received by appellants from Principal tour operator are chargeable to tax. (Paras 3 & 6) Service Tax Tour operators service - Taxable service - Section 65 of Finance Act, 1994 - Supplementary services, namely, Guide service, Monument visit service, Porter service, Food service, General assistance service etc. - provided in relation to tour - taxable tour operators service even prior to 10.9.2004. (Paras 3.1 & 6) Service Tax Limitation - Demand - Section 73 of Finance Act, 1994 extende d time limit invokable as charges received by appellants from principal tour operator for providing taxable supplementary services were not declared. (Paras 4 & 6) Service Tax Taxable value - Section 67 of Finance Act, 1994 - Tour operator's service - amount paid as advance to tour escorts and on account of inter branch billing and reimbursed by principal tour operator - not includible. (Para 5) Service Tax Penalty - Section 76 and 78 of Finance Act, 1994 - leviable as appellants wilfully suppressed relevant information. (Para 6) 2008 (88) RLT 891 (CESTAT-Ban.) (In the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore) Present : Dr. S.L. Peeran, Member (Judicial) Shri T.K. Jayaraman, Member (Technical) HANDIMAN SERVICES LTD. Versus CST, BANGALORE (Final Order No. 894/2008 dt. 28.7.2008 certified on 6.8.2008 in Appeal No. ST/83/2007) Service Tax Penalty - Section 76 and 78 of Finance Act, 1994 - appellants paid service tax before issue of show cause notice - adjudicating authority dropped penal proceedings - Revisionary authority should not have imposed penalty penalty set aside - appeal allowed. (Para 5)