TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 173X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... service? - Held that:- The Apex court in the case of Singh Transporters [2017 (7) TMI 494 - SUPREME COURT] has decided in identical circumstances that the activity cannot be charged under mining service but more appropriately classifiable under transportation of goods by road service - the demand of service tax for the period upto 31/06/2012 set aside. Demand for the period on or after 01/07/2012 - bundled services or not? - the case of Revenue is that the loading of coal on tippers on the coal face as well as transportation thereof upto the railway siding is to be considered as a bundled activity, whose essential character is mining - Held that:- Even though the activities of transportation of coal has taken place within the mining area ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er this agreement, the appellant was required to carry out the operations of loading of coal at coal face in the case of open cost mines. The coal which is mined was required to be loaded into tipper/trucks in terms of this agreement ; (ii) transportation agreement :- as per this agreement, the appellant was required to transport the coal from coal face (i.e. a place where the coal is mined) to the railway siding/dump/stock yards within the mining area. W.e.f. 01/06/2007, mining services were included in the statute book for payment of service tax and from such date, the appellants have been discharging service tax liability under mining services as far as the consideration received for the Loading Agreement. As far as the consideration rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellants were liable to payment of service tax without the abatements available for GTA service, for the activity comprised in both the agreements. The differential service tax has been ordered to be paid alongwith interest and penalties. Aggrieved by the decisions, the present appeals stand filed. 4. With the above background, we heard Shri A.K. Batra, learned C.A. representing both the appellants as well as Shri Amresh Jain, learned DR for the Revenue. 5. The case of the appellants is argued as follows :- (i) as far as the liability of service tax on the transportation agreement, the learned C.A. argued that the decision of the Tribunal for the earlier period vide order dated 04/01/2017 (supra) will be applicable to the period under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... into two separate agreements with SECL for loading of coal from the coal face to the tipper trucks and for transporting the same from the same point to railway siding which is also within the mining area. He submitted that the contracts have been artificially vivisected even though the activity comprised is nothing but different aspects of mining. He emphasized the fact that both activities are performed within the mining area. He referred to the Section 66F of the Finance Act and the relevant discussions made by the Adjudicating Authorities in the paragraph 7.8 to 7.13 and submitted that both loading and transportation of ore constitute a single bundled service with the essential character of mining. Accordingly, he submitted that the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs (supra) is of no consequence to the present case, we are of the view that the activity undertaken by the respondent i.e. transportation of coal from the pit-heads to the railway sidings within the mining areas is more appropriately classifiable under Section 65(105)(zzp) of the Act, namely, under the head transport of goods by road service and does not involve any service in relation to mining of mineral, oil or gas as provided by Section 65(105)(zzzy) of the Act . 10. By following the decision of the Apex court and the Tribunal s own decision in the case of one of the appellants vide final order No. 50013-50015 of 2016 dated 04/01/2017, we set aside the demand of service tax for the period upto 31/06/2012. 11. For the period ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ies are to be performed within the mining area, is no reason to bundle the two together and to take the view that provision of one service is combined with an element of provision of the other service. The difference in the quantity of coal loaded and the quantity being transported clearly show that the appellant is not doing transportation the loaded coal is a continuous activity. Perusal of the terms of the contract clearly indicate that the two are independent contracts. It may very well be that SECL has contracted the two activities to two different contractors. 13. W.e.f. 01/07/2012, the definition of individual services has been done away with. But the benefit of abatements granted to goods transport agencies have been continued ev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
