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>Supreme Court Upholds Decision on Service Classification</h1> <h3>Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax, Customs and Excise, Jabalpur Versus M/s Baghel Brothers</h3> Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax, Customs and Excise, Jabalpur Versus M/s Baghel Brothers - TMI Issues involved:The issue involves determining whether the appellant provided 'cargo handling service' for the period 2007-2008 to 2012-2013 and 'mining service' for the period post 01.06.2007.Cargo Handling Service Issue:The Commissioner filed an appeal challenging the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) allowing the appeal and setting aside the order passed by the Additional Commissioner. The Supreme Court's decision in Singh Transporters case was relied upon, where it was held that transporting coal from pitheads to railway sidings falls under 'transport of goods by road service' and not under 'mining of mineral' service. The Supreme Court clarified that the definition of 'mines' does not have a direct connection with the activity undertaken. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in holding that the appellant did not provide mining service from 01.06.2007 onwards.Mining Service Issue:The activities undertaken by the appellant before 01.06.2007 were also considered. The Supreme Court's ruling indicated that these activities should be classified under 'transport of goods by road service' rather than 'cargo handling service.' Consequently, it was determined that the appellant did not provide cargo handling service before 01.06.2007 as per section 65(23) of the Finance Act.Conclusion:The judgment dismissed the appeal, upholding the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) that the appellant did not provide cargo handling service or mining service as per the relevant provisions.
TaxTMI 