TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (8) TMI 957
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... from the appellant. Accordingly, the appeal is taken up and disposed of on merits. 2. Heard the learned departmental representative and perused the records. 3. On perusal of the records, we find that the issue involved in this case is regarding the taxability of the services rendered by the appellant of making arrangements for activities of harvesting of sugarcane, loading and unloading and transportation of sugarcane in and for various sugar factories. It is the allegation in the show cause notice that the appellant herein on receiving payment from sugar factories retains a part of the amount while paying the sub-contractors and also charges the sugar factory an amount of Management fee, accordingly the show cause notice raised demand u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... their fields, load them in various vehicles and deliver them at factory site. For these services, the respondent was to get charges on tonnage basis. This work, on the face of it, clearly involves manpower. The respondent, admittedly, engaged number of labour for harvesting the sugarcane , loading it in vehicle and unloading it at factory site. During the course of work, the respondent on one hand and the sugar factory on the other, exchanged number of documents which showed that the sugar factory specifically paid certain amounts towards labour charges, harvesting charges and transportation charges etc. At some point of time, the sugar factory even paid certain amounts towards Service Tax. Having regard to these facts, a notice was issued....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... counsel for the appellant tried quite hard to convince this Court that looking to the nature of work undertaken by the respondent, it would come within the definition of manpower recruitment. She placed reliance on the words "supply of manpower" used in the definition of Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency, quoted above. She tried to suggest that the respondent admittedly supplied manpower for harvesting, loading and unloading the goods and therefore we must hold that the services provided by the respondent would become supply of manpower. 6. We are not inclined to accept this submission because, as said above, the services provided by the respondent, though for harvesting, loading, unloading, etc., it was essentially a package deal thr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gh to draw the above conclusion. In this background, we must look at the show cause notice dated 16.10.2008. On that date, whether the Revenue was in a position to levy tax on services provided by the respondent? The answer has to be in negative. Having regard to the history of service tax in our country, it becomes clear that when the State was in the process of including various types of services in service tax net, the State's policy was to include different services at different point of time. For the first time in 1997, the State included Recruitment Service as taxable service. Slowly, labour contract services were also made taxable in the year 2005. The package deal which is involved in this case was not subjected to service tax i....