https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357579 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the order that classified the services under "Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency Service." The Tribunal found that the appellant's activities, involving material handling and shifting with employees under its direct control and supervision, did not meet the criteria for such classification. The agreement between the parties indicated that the appellant had autonomy over the employees' deployment and work execution, leading the Tribunal to conclude that the services provided did not fall within the scope of "Manpower Recruitment and Supply Agency Service." The appeal was allowed on 10.11.2017. en-us Fri, 10 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Apr 2018 12:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357579 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the order that classified the services under "Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency Service." The Tribunal found that the appellant's activities, involving material handling and shifting with employees under its direct control and supervision, did not meet the criteria for such classification. The agreement between the parties indicated that the appellant had autonomy over the employees' deployment and work execution, leading the Tribunal to conclude that the services provided did not fall within the scope of "Manpower Recruitment and Supply Agency Service." The appeal was allowed on 10.11.2017. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 10 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357579