TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appeal successful: Service tax liability demand set aside for Manpower Recruitment Agency.</h1> <h3>M/s. Rita Painting & Powder Coating Works Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune I</h3> M/s. Rita Painting & Powder Coating Works Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune I - TMI Issues:Service tax liability on the appellant under the category of Manpower Recruitment and Supply Agency service.Analysis:The appeal was directed against a specific order dated 24.01.2011. Despite the appellant's absence, the appeals were taken up for disposal. The interconnected appeals were disposed of by a common order. The Departmental Representative argued that the issue revolved around the service tax liability on the appellant under the Manpower Recruitment and Supply Agency service due to job work undertaken at a client's premises. The appellants contested the demand, claiming the job work was a lumpsum contract. Invoices raised on the client did not explicitly state they were for labor supply, but indicated lumpsum job work rates. The Tribunal referred to a previous case, Ritesh Enterprises, where a similar demand was set aside. The Tribunal found that the judgment in the Ritesh Enterprises case applied to the current situation. Consequently, based on the facts and circumstances, the appeals were allowed, and the impugned orders were set aside.This judgment primarily dealt with the issue of service tax liability under the Manpower Recruitment and Supply Agency service category. The Departmental Representative argued that the job work undertaken by the appellants at the client's premises should be considered a service falling under this category. However, the appellants contended that the work was a lumpsum contract, supported by the nature of invoices issued. The Tribunal, after examining the invoices and considering the precedent set by the Ritesh Enterprises case, concluded that the demand under the Manpower Recruitment and Supply Agency service should be set aside in this instance as well. The decision was based on the similarity of the issues and the application of the previous judgment's ratio to the current case.
TaxTMI 