https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329492 The tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision, ruling that the contracts were for lumpsum work, not for the supply of manpower services. The tribunal found that the essence of the contracts was the execution of detailed work schedules, indicating a lumpsum contract for material handling and ancillary works. As a result, the appeal by Revenue was dismissed as lacking merit, with the tribunal citing relevant case law to support its decision. en-us Mon, 07 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 Jul 2016 14:41:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329492 The tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision, ruling that the contracts were for lumpsum work, not for the supply of manpower services. The tribunal found that the essence of the contracts was the execution of detailed work schedules, indicating a lumpsum contract for material handling and ancillary works. As a result, the appeal by Revenue was dismissed as lacking merit, with the tribunal citing relevant case law to support its decision. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 07 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329492