TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1687X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... RVICE TAX, RAIPUR VERSUS SINGH TRANSPORTERS [ 2017 (7) TMI 494 - SUPREME COURT ]. Period 1 July, 2012 onwards - HELD THAT:- Even for the period 1 July, 2012 onwards the activity undertaken by the appellant would be taxable under the Transportation of Goods service in view of the decision of this Tribunal in M/s H.N. Coal Transport Private Limited versus Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Raipur [ 2018 (8) TMI 173 - CESTAT NEW DELHI ] where it was held that for the period w.e.f. 01/07/2012, the activity of transportation of coal from the coal face to the railway siding will continue to enjoy the benefit available to goods transport agency and cannot be bundled into a single service under Section 66F alongwith lifting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... coal from coal face to dispatch point through motor vehicles within the mines of M/s South Eastern Coal Field Limited under two separate agreements. The Department alleged that the amount received by the appellant from M/s South Eastern Coal Fields Limited in lieu of the activity of transportation of coal from pitheads/coal face to railway siding within the mining area was taxable under Cargo Handling Services . 3. The appellant, however, had been discharging service tax liability of this service under the category of Goods Transport Agency Service . 4. The first Show Cause Notice dated 20 March, 2012 is for the period March, 2008 to January, 2012. The second Show Cause Notice dated 21 October, 2013 is for the period February, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4,48,19,354 Total Demand for the period July, 2012 to 31.03.2014 3,59,10,537 Grand Total 8,07,29,891 6. The Order-in-Original confirms the demand made in the three Show Cause Notices for the entire disputed period under Cargo Handling Services . According to the appellant, there were two separate agreements, namely, a loading agreement and a transport agreement. Under the loading agreement, the activity undertaken by the appellant was for loading of coal from open caste mine to coal face into tipper trucks for which activity service tax was discharged under Mining services . Under the transport agreement, the activity undertaken ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h Transporters and the relevant portion of the judgment is reproduced below: .....................We are of the view that the activity undertaken by the respondent i.e. transportation of coal from the pit-heads to the railway siding 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 services and does not involve any service in relation to mining of mineral, oil or gas as provided by Section 65(105(zzp) of the Act. 11. Even for the period 1 July, 2012 onwards the activity undertaken by the appellant would be taxable under the Transportation of Goods service in view of the decision of this Tribunal in H.N. Coal and the relevant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m the coal face to the railway siding. Simply because both the activities 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 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
