Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (4) TMI 111

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d by various Benches of the Tribunal and has held in favour of the appellant/ assessee. Reliance can be placed in M/S. LINDSTROM SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD. VERSUS PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF GST CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAI [ 2021 (9) TMI 71 - CESTAT CHENNAI] where it was held that The issue as to whether the activity of renting of workwear is a service or deemed sale has been analyzed by this Tribunal in the appellant s own case [ 2020 (11) TMI 14 - CESTAT CHENNAI ] for a different period, where it was held that work wear does not amount to supply of tangible goods so as to attract service tax. The final order of Chennai Bench of CESTAT were appealed by the Revenue before the Hon ble Supreme Court - the Hon ble Supreme Court in PRINCIPAL COMMISSION .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... greements with their clients. During the financial year 2013-14, Service Tax Audit of Chennai Branch of appellant was conducted by the officials of Service Tax Department which was shortly followed by a visit at the premises of the appellant at Faridabad branch also. Based on the information provided and statements given, a Show- Cause Notice dated 12.02.2015 was issued for the period 2010-11 to 2014-15 (till October 2014). The Show-Cause Notice was adjudicated vide Order-in-Original dated 27.11.2015. The appeal against the said order was filed before the Tribunal on 24.02.2016 with the contention, inter alia, that the appellant had transferred the Right to Use the workwears to its customers. The possession and effective controls remained w .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ts customers is not amenable to service tax and this issue has been finally settled in favour of the appellant. 5. Learned Authorized Representative for the Department reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, we find that the issue involved in the present case has earlier been considered in the appellant‟s own case for the earlier period by various Benches of the Tribunal and has held in favour of the appellant/ assessee. In support of her submission, she produced the following orders of the Tribunal: Lindstrom Service India Pvt. Ltd. Vs CCE ST, Faridabad- Final Order No.60716/2019 dated 02.08.2019. Lindstrom Service India Pvt. Ltd. V .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ement are as follows:- a. The assessee will only lease the work wear to their customers / clients b. The assessee arranges the fittings which finally determine the needed number of specific work wear and service free per product is charged for the same. LSIP is entitled to take an inventory of all products. c. The assessee owns the leased work wear and keeps the exclusive right of washing, maintenance, repairing, alteration etc. of work wear with itself and their customers are not free to avail these services from any third party. d. The assessee shall collect the work wear for Servicing, Packing and Transportation on weekly basis. Thereafter, they wash, inspect and repair and finish them industrially. e. In case of termination of the contr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... are of the considered opinion that the impugned order cannot sustain. The same is set aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any. 8. Following the decisions, we are of the considered opinion that the demand raised cannot sustain and requires to be set aside, which we hereby do. The impugned order is set aside. The appeal is allowed with consequential relief if any, as per law. 8. We also find that the two final orders of Chennai Bench of CESTAT were appealed by the Revenue before the Hon ble Supreme Court vide Civil Appeal Nos. 6459/2021 and 4491/2022. We also find that the Hon ble Supreme Court has dismissed the appeals of the Revenue vide Order dated 09th October 2023 as being without merit and the copy of the order .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates