TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 188X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... liquor. As such work is required to be carried out by the various persons supplied by the contractor under the supervision of the assesse s agents or their authorized persons. The same does not amount to carrying out job-work activity by the contractor - We have also scrutinized the contract and the rate list entered into between the appellant and their contractor. The same prescribes rates on per shift basis, though the expected standard production in that shift also stands mentioned in the said contract. Further the overtime rates also stands mentioned in the said list, thus indicating that if the manpower supplied by the contractor works overtime, he would be given further wages for the same. This only establishes that the essence of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... they should be refunded the Service Tax so paid by them. The refund claim was filed on 15.01.2014 for the period starting from 01.10.2013. 2. The said refund claims were rejected by the Assistant Commissioner partly on the ground of time bar and partly on the ground that the appellant himself is the manufacturer of the liquor and the contractor was not manufacturing the liquor on behalf of the appellant. As such he held that payment of Service Tax by the appellant was in accordance with law. 3. The said order of original adjudicating authority was appealed against by the appellant before the Commissioner(Appeals). They reiterated their grounds that payment of Service Tax was a mistake on their part inasmuch as the activity of bottling ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... both sides and have gone through the impugned orders. 6. There is no dispute that by various decisions of the Hon ble High Courts it has been held that the bottling of liquor amounts to manufacture and the manufacturing process in respect of bottling has to be taken out of the Service Tax net. Accordingly it stands held that packaging and bottling of liquor being covered under manufacture is not liable to Service Tax. 7. However, we find that the issue in the present case is not relatable to the fact as to whether packaging and bottling of liquor would attract Service Tax or not. In the present case Service Tax has been discharged by the appellant on reverse charge basis in respect of Manpower Supply Services rendered by the contrac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rules of the company on submission of Pay-Sheet duly verified from the Security/Production Deptt or as deemed fit by the management. Rest of the expenses such as medical expenses, distribution of sweets, conveyance, Income Tax, Entertainment etc. are to be born by you for which company shall not be responsible. iii) The rates of wages of workers involved in the above said jobs shall be revised as per the statutory requirement of minimum wages or otherwise from time to time but the amount of profit will remain the same as agreed to under this agreement. 7) That for carrying out jobs covered by this contract you shall follow the instruction of the Company s authorized representatives and Excise Officer-in-charge. 9. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cordingly on prorata basis. Presently, you will have to deploy the labour/workmen as per the discussion held with you and agreed upon. 10. The appellate authority has scrutinized the said contracts and has observed as under:- On perusal of the terms and conditions of the contract, it is clear that the basic work of the contractor is to supply man power to the manufacturing unit of the appellant for carrying out various other activities besides bottling of IMFL liquor as elaborated in terms and conditions of the Contract. Thus these contractors have the status of Contract Labour as evident from highlighted paras supra. I further observe from the scope of work mentioned in the contract, that the activities/works carried out by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e one hand and the fabricators on the other as the appellants have right to tell the fabricators that what to do and how to do. In other words works have to be carried out under the total control and supervision of the assessee. As such the fabricators are held to be hired labour and not independent manufacturer. In the case of Interscape v. CCE, Calcutta [2001 (135) ELT 942 (Tri.-Kolkata)], it was observed that mere raising of the bills against the labour contractors on rate contracts based upon profit basis and not on wage basis cannot imply that it was the sub-contractor, who was the manufacturer. 12. We have also scrutinized the contract and the rate list entered into between the appellant and their contractor. The same prescribes ra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
