Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2016 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (12) TMI 797 - AT - Service TaxClassification of services - providing of labour - whether the service would fall under the head cargo handling services or manpower supply agency service? - Held that: - Department has not given any additional facts to hold that services rendered by the respondent are under the category of cargo handling services and not under the category of man power recruitment agency service. The CESTAT Delhi’s decision in the case of J J Enterprises [2005 (3) TMI 14 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI] also supports the stand of the respondent, where it was held that Cargo handing cannot take place in the absence of packing machine and conveyer - besides the Commissioner (A) also found that The appellant has taken registration on 18.08.2005 under the category of Man power supply agency’s services. Since then the appellant is discharging service tax liability under the said service and filing ST-3 returns. The demand is to the effect that for the period 01.08.2004 to 15.06.2005 i.e. prior to 16.06.2005 the appellant were covered under the category of “Cargo Handling Services” for which neither any registration was taken nor service tax was discharged. The appellant have come up with a plea that the activities undertaken by them having remained the same i.e. during the period 01.08.2004 to 15.06.2005 and from 16.06.2005 till date, no reasons have been given for the change of classification of services before and from 16.06.2005. At present the appellants services are being accepted as Man power supply agency’s services an taxes are being collected under this head. As on date the “Cargo handling services” are still in existence. No efforts have been made to change the present classification to “cargo handling services”. Neither the investigators nor the adjudicating authority have given the reasons as to why the impugned services were classifiable under cargo handling before 16.6.2005 and under man power recruitment from 16.06.2005. We are in agreement with the findings of the Commissioner (A). Consequently, the Revenue’s appeal is without merits and is hereby rejected - decided against Revenue.
|