9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 466X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to 30.05.2007 and under "mining service" for the period 01.06.2007 onwards has been confirmed. 2. The appellant provided services to Western Coalfields Limited at different areas claiming it to be under "goods transport agency service", and claims that Western Coalfields Limited discharged the service tax liability under the reverse charge mechanism. 3. A show cause notice dated 18.02.2012 was, however, issued to the appellant on the allegation that the services provided by the appellant to Western Coalfields Limited was taxable under various services including "cargo handling services" and "mining services". As noticed above the adjudicating authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) have upheld the demand of service tax under "cargo handl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that all processing including handling and movement of coal from one point of mines to dispatch point of mines are activities carried out in relation to mining of minerals. 8. The issue as to was whether coal transported from pitheads of the mines to the railway sidings would fall within the taxable service defined under section 65 (105) (zzzy) of the Finance Act was examined by the Supreme Court in Singh Transporters. The Supreme Court held that the activity would appropriately be classified under the head "transport of goods by road" service and the activity does not involve any taxable service in relation to "mining of mineral" as contemplated under section 65(105) (zzzy) of the Finance Act. The Supreme Court also held that the defini ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... parent nexus with the activity undertaken and the service rendered." 9. It would be seen that the Supreme Court categorically held that the activity undertaken by the appellant would fall under the head "transportation of goods by road" service. The Commissioner (Appeals) was, therefore, not justified in holding that the appellant had undertaken the activity of mining service w.e.f. 01.06.2007. 10. It would also not possible to sustain the order passed by the Commissioner holding that these activities undertaken by the appellant prior to 01.06.2007 would fall under the category of "cargo handling service‟. This is for the reason that the Supreme Court categorically held that the activity undertaken by the appellant would fall under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
