Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2017 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (9) TMI 1072 - AT - Service TaxClassification of services - Cargo Handling Services or Manpower Recruitment Agency service - case of Revenue is that the appellant has not provided any evidence on record except a contract dated 25.10.2005 awarded to them by JCT for internal handling and movement of raw material, finished goods, husk feeding and misc. jobs - Held that: - even in terms of the said contract, services to be provided by the appellant were internal movement of the cargo in the factory of the JCT. There is no dispute on the above scope of the services provided by the appellant - the issue stands decided in the case of Gaytri Construction Co. Vs. CCE, Jaipur [2011 (9) TMI 481 - CESTAT, New Delhi], where it was held that shifting of goods within the factory premises and the manpower supplied by the service provider cannot be held to be classifiable under Cargo Handling Service. The appellants have contended the service fall under the category of Manpower Recruitment Agency, which were brought under the service tax w.e.f 16.06.2005. The appellant was also registered with the said category w.e.f. 28.06.2005 by the department itself and thereafter, no objection has been taken by the Revenue. These facts support the appellants claim that they were providing Manpower Recruitment Agency service even during the period prior to their date of registration. Extended period of limitation - Held that: - No specific instances or evidence of any suppression or mis-statement with a mala-fide intention stands attributed to the appellant, except a bald statement that they did not get themselves registered and did not follow the due procedure, so as to justifiable invoke the longer period of limitation - extended period not invocable. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|