https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781975 CESTAT Hyderabad partly allowed the assessee's appeal. It held that in-plant handling and movement of steel within the factory, including cutting, bending, de-coiling and internal transportation, did not constitute Cargo Handling Service; demand under this head was set aside except for limited wagon loading/unloading activities, which were not dominant. For Management, Maintenance or Repair Service, the Tribunal upheld classification and demand, finding the contracts to be in the nature of maintenance/repair even prior to 16.06.2005. It affirmed classification of certain works under Commercial or Industrial Construction Service, rejecting the plea of Works Contract and denial of abatement due to absence of material supply. Demand under Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency Service was set aside for services rendered prior to 16.06.2005. Extended limitation was held invocable. en-us Fri, 21 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Nov 2025 08:57:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781975 CESTAT Hyderabad partly allowed the assessee's appeal. It held that in-plant handling and movement of steel within the factory, including cutting, bending, de-coiling and internal transportation, did not constitute Cargo Handling Service; demand under this head was set aside except for limited wagon loading/unloading activities, which were not dominant. For Management, Maintenance or Repair Service, the Tribunal upheld classification and demand, finding the contracts to be in the nature of maintenance/repair even prior to 16.06.2005. It affirmed classification of certain works under Commercial or Industrial Construction Service, rejecting the plea of Works Contract and denial of abatement due to absence of material supply. Demand under Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency Service was set aside for services rendered prior to 16.06.2005. Extended limitation was held invocable. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 21 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781975