2022-VIL-861-CESTAT-AHM-ST

SERVICE TAX CESTAT Cases

Service Tax - Appellant entered into agreement with the principal for packing and salvaging activities - The appellant was paid for carrying out such activities on per Kgs / Per Metric Ton basis. The workmen deployed by the appellant for carrying out such activities were under the supervision and control of the appellant – revenue contention that the activity of the appellant is covered under the definition of manpower recruitment agency – Demand of service tax under Manpower Recruitment and Supply Agency Service – HELD - The appellant was paid for carrying out such activities on per Kgs / Per Metric Ton basis. The workmen deployed by the appellant for carrying out such activities were under the supervision and control of the appellant - M/s Pino, who entrusted the job contract to the appellant was no way concerned with the workmen deployed by the appellant - over and above paying the amount for activities undertaken by the appellant on job contract basis, the service receiver had not paid any specific price to the workmen deployed by the appellant - Since there is no specific mention about deployment of labour/work force, the services provided by the appellant should not fall under the taxable category of manpower recruitment or supply agency service - it cannot be said that the appellant had provided the Manpower Recruitment and Supply Agency Service - service tax demands confirmed on the appellant cannot be sustained and set aside – assessee appeal is allowed

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page