Just a moment...

βœ•
Top
Help
πŸš€ New: Section-Wise Filter βœ•

1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β€” now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available

2. New: β€œIn Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.

Try both these filters in Case Laws β†’

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedbackβœ•

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2017 (11) TMI 350

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ndent ORDER Per: Ramesh Nair This appeal is directed against Order-in-Original No.03/ST/2012 dated 6-8-2012 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Nashik, whereby demand of Service Tax amounting to Rs. 82,05,655/- under the category of Manpower Recruitment and Supply Agency was confirmed, also demanded interest under Section 75 and imposed penalty under Secti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... said decision it was held that Manpower deputed to the group companies is not provision of service, hence the same is not liable for service tax. During the argument of the counsel, bench has asked to submit share holding pattern of all the group companies to whom the appellant have deputed their manpower. The appellant filed letter dated 30-7-2017 and submitted share holding pattern of all the g....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e term "Group Company", it cannot be concluded whether company is group company or otherwise. Share holding pattern submitted by the appellant is reproduced below: From above share holding pattern, it is observed that in some companies share holding is less than 50%, therefore it cannot be said that these are subsidiaries of the appellant. Similarly in other subsidiary companies it has to be as....