TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 786X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - ST/365 and 366/12 - A/86253-86254/17/STB - Dated:- 8-3-2017 - Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Mr. C.J. Mathew, Member (Technical) Shri M.P.K. Joshi, Advocate for appellant Shri Ahibharan, Addl. Commr (AR) for respondent ORDER Per M. V. Ravindran These two appeals are directed against orders-in-original No. PI/Commr/ST/10/2012 dated 20.02.2012 and PI/Commr/ST/11/2012 dated 27.02.2012. 2. Since the issue that falls for consideration in both the appeals is the same and arising out of similar set of facts, the are being disposed of by a common order. 3. The relevant facts that arise for consideration, after filtering out unnecessary details, are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment or supply agency services' to M/s. KLL is concerned it is his submission that the agreement entered by appellant with KLL is for processing of the goods in the premises of the said KLL and is not manpower recruitment or supply agency services. He would draw our attention to various clauses of the work order/agreement entered by appellants with KLL and submit that appellants were paid per piece basis and appellants are free to engage any number of workmen and complete the job. He would submit that this activity would not fall under the category of manpower recruitment or supply agency services and is a lumpsum work. He would rely upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Divya Enterprises - 2010 (19) STR 370 (Tri. Bang.) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /s Caparo Engineering, M/s Tata DLT International and M/s. Bosch Chasis, since the liability is not disputed and has been collected from the customer but not deposited to the Government, tax liability with interest and penalties needs to be upheld as also in the case the services rendered to KLL. 6. We have considered the submissions made at length by both sides and perused the records. 6.1 The issue in this case is whether the appellants have rendered the services of manpower recruitment or supply agency service or otherwise. 6.2 As regards the services rendered by appellants to M/s Caparo Engineering, M/s Tata DLT International and M/s. Bosch Chassis, the same is not disputed by the appellants in the grounds of appeals and have a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... This, in our considered view is nothing but lumpsum work awarded to appellants by KLL. We find strong force in the contentions put forth by the learned Counsel that the issue is covered by the decision of Divya Enterprises (supra) and Ritesh Enterprises (supra). 6.4 Holding that the service tax liability on the amounts received from KLL by appellants is not taxable under manpower recruitment or supply agency service for the reasons cited herein above we set aside the demand confirmed on this category and for reworking the exact demand in respect of the services rendered to M/s. KLL, M/s Caparo Engineering, M/s Tata DLT International and M/s. Bosch Chassis. 7. Appeals are disposed of as indicated herein above. (Order pronounced ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
