ORDER

M.S. Sanklecha, J. (P.C.) - This appeal under Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (the Act) challenges the order dated 9th July, 2014 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal).

2. The appeal as filed inter alia raised the following question of law for our consideration :

(a) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in overlooking the fact that the head "cargo handling services" specifically covers services rendered by a "container Freight Station", which the appellant was and still sought to tax its services under "storage and warehousing services"?

3. At the hearing, Mr. Jain, learned Counsel appearing in support of the appeal submitted the following reframed questions of law, as under for our consideration :

(a) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the activity of providing an earmarked space within the container Freight Station to some customers for the specific purpose of stuffing export Cargo into containers was a Taxable or not covered under the head "Storage and Warehousing Services"?

(b) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the legislative intent of not taxing services in relation to export cargo could be frustrated by seeking to tax one of the legs of the transaction of exporting goods, contrary to the statutory intention?

(c) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, a partial extended period of limitation could have been invoked (from February 2005 onwards) when otherwise the Tribunal dropped penalty proceedings under Section 78 and also concluded that facts had been declared?

4. The appellant is registered under the Finance Act, 1994 and rendering services under the ''cargo handling" service and paying service tax. The appellant has set up a "Container Freight Station" (CFS) at Dronagiri Warehousing Complex, Uran, Navi Mumbai. The appellant had entered into a contract with M/s. Maersk Logistics India Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "MLIL" for short) to provides various services. As per the contract, MLIL was provided space in its CFS for keeping, storing, stuffing and consolidation of export cargo for specific consideration during the period 2002 to 2004.

5. However, for the period beginning w.e.f. 1st April, 2005, although the Appellant was providing the services for keeping, storing, stuffing of cargo at its CFS to MLIL and to others along with its service of ''cargo handling" no separate consideration was charged in respect of the keeping, storing service provided to MLIL and the others. At the same time, the charges for ''cargo handling'' was substantially increased and the charges attributable to storage etc. were claimed as exempt being export cargo. The Revenue was of the view that the provision of service of keeping, storing etc. in the CFS by the appellant is a separate and distinct service under the category of "Storage and Warehousing" services, not classifiable under the head "Cargo Handling" services. Thus, a show cause-cumdemand notice was issued. The respondent resisted the same. The Commissioner of Central Excise by order dated 5th September, 2007 adjudicated the show cause notice, confirming the classification of the service of keeping, storing etc. at the CFS under the head ''storage and warehousing''.

6. Being aggrieved, the Appellant preferred an appeal to the Tribunal. The impugned order dated 9th July, 2014 has held that the services rendered by the appellant at the CFS would fall under the head "Storage and Warehousing" services and not be covered under the head "Cargo Handling" services. This after negativing the appellant''s contention that the services rendered by it to the MLIL and others at the CFS was in the nature of "Cargo Handling" services and excluded from tax as it was in the course of export.

7. Ms. Cardozo, the learned Counsel, raised a preliminary objection that the