TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (8) TMI 449
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for loading, unloading and shifting of sugar bags from the floor of the mills to godown, from one godown to another godown or as desired by their clients. M/s Jaspal Darshan Lal and M/s Darshan Lal were issued with show cause notice dated 17.10.2007. The show cause notice alleged that the respondents were providing cargo handling service. In the signal show cause notice two business entities were issued with demand. M/s Jaspal Darshan Lal was called upon to show cause as to why Service Tax to the tune of Rs. 24,16,100/- for the period from 16.08.2002 to 31.12.2005 should not be demanded from him. In the same show cause notice M/s Darshan Lal was called upon to show cause as to why Service Tax to the tune of Rs. 15,04,834/- for the period f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing services. In view of the foregoing facts and provisions of law on the issue, the activity of the appellants do not appear to come within the purview of "Cargo Handling Services" as the appellant did not have any cargo handling agency as required under sec. 65(105)(zr) of the Finance Act, 1994 nor they were working as a cargo handling agency at any other place except the aforesaid sugar mill where they were working actually as labourers. However, the said activity i.e. supply of labour would be more appropriately covered under the category of manpower recruitment agency and not cargo handling agency service. Since the issue in the impugned order as well as in appeal is not related to Manpower Recruitment Agency, as both t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... discussions and findings, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential benefit if any to the appellants." 4. Challenging the said Order-in-Appeal dated 24.12.2008 Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax Meerut-l has preferred this appeal and prayed to set aside the said Order-in-Appeal. The ground of appeal is that as per CBEC Circular dated 01.08.2002 if the cargo handling service is provided by individual that does not come under the preview of taxability. In the instant case Cargo Handling Service is provided by partnership firm hence the said Circular is not applicable. 5. Heard the Learned Departmental Representative. He has reiterated the ground of appeal and relied on this ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s on trucks. Further, he has relied on this Tribunal's decision in the case of Gaytri Construction Co. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur 2012 (25) S.T.R. 259 (Tri-Del.). This Tribunal in the said case has held that shifting of goods within factory premises will not come within the scope of cargo handling services. Therefore, their case is squarely covered by the case law in the case of Gaytri Construction Co. (supra). 7. We have carefully gone through the rival contentions. We find that in the case of Maharaja group and Associates (supra) the work was related to opening of wagon doors, cleaning and closing of doors after cement loading. It was also observed by this Tribunal in the said case that the services rendered in that ca....