TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 1013X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll not be covered under the category of "Manpower Supply Recruitment Services". This view is expressed by the Bench in the case of Seven Hills Construction vs. Commr. Of Service [2013 (12) TMI 961 - CESTAT MUMBAI]. - Decided against Revenue. - Appeal No.ST/652/2010-Mum, ST/CO/2012-Mum - - - Dated:- 23-4-2015 - M V Ravindran, Member (J) And P S Pruthi, Member (Technical),JJ. For the Appellant : Shri B Kumar Iyer, Superintendent (AR) For the Respondent : Shri P V Sadavarte, Advocate (AR) ORDER Per: M V Ravindran: This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. SR/271/NGP/2010 dt. 25.08.2010. 2. Revenue is aggrieved by the said order on the ground that the adjudicating authorities Order-in-Original confirmi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lants is over, M/s. Amitasha Enterprises PVt. Ltd. enter the production in its Daily Stock Register (RG-1) and clear the goods on payment of appropriate rate of duty. The entire job is carried out within the factory premises before RG-1 stage. Thus the activity undertaken by the Appellants is with respect to the goods which are still on the production line of M/s. Amitasha Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. In view of the scope of the Notification No. 8/2005-ST dated 1.03.2005, I hold that, the demand of Service Tax from the Appellant with respect to the aforesaid activity done by the appellant by the lower authority is not sustainable. The Appellant has also relied heavily on the Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of M/s. Ritesh Enterprises vs. CCE, B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e case law is squarely applicable in the instance case and therefore the impugned Order-in-Original is liable to be quashed. As against the above factual matrix and the judicial pronouncement, in the instant case of the respondent assessee, we find that the grounds of appeal basically relies upon the license issued to the respondent-assessee by the office of the Licensing Officer, Government of Maharashtra, holding that Amitasha Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. is a principal employer. In our considered view, this may not change complexion of the services in any way as the entire records clearly indicate that the respondent-assessee was given a lumpsum contract of carrying out the job in the factory premises of Amitasha Enterprises. This activity ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
