9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 1203X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e respondent. ORDER Per B. Ravichandran: The appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 30.09.2013 of Commissioner (Appeals), Delhi-I. 2. A service tax demand of Rs. 5,37,841/- was confirmed against the appellant by the Original Authority, for providing "Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency Services" in terms of Section 65 (68) of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellants claimed that they are do ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ervice directly on indirectly, in any manner for recruitment of manpower, to a client". 5. It is seen that the appellants have been contesting the demand, from the beginning, on the ground that they are not a manpower supply agency. They have undertaken job of cutting or packing of footwear, in the premises of the client, as per the instructions of the client. There is no written agreement in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... their letter dated 9.2.2009, stated that there was no contract for labour supply between them. The arrangement is to pay at the labour rates for completion of job undertaken towards packing of finished goods and cutting of footwear components. The documents submitted by the appellant indicate a lump sum charge for the work undertaken by them. There is no evidence of supply of manpower with detail ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Manpower Recruitment and Supply Agency Service from the appellant. I find no evidence to support such assertion, in the records of the appeal. In absence of any supporting evidence, it is not feasible to contend that the appellants provided taxable service under the category of "Manpower Recruitment and Supply Agency Service". In fact, evidences submitted by the appellant indicate to the contra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
