2018 (6) TMI 386

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lassification of service OIO (findi ngs) OIA (findin gs) Set aside/u pheld in OIA 1. Slime disposal 29,43,470 Cleaning Service Para 13(a) Sl. No.1 Set aside 2. Loading of granulated slag in to wagons & trucks 3,54,661 Cargo Handling Service Para 13(b) Sl. No.2 Accepted and paid before SCN. Upheld 3. Pig Iron Handling in Corex I & II in factory of JSW Steel Ltd. 16,872 Cargo Handling service Para 13(c) Sl. No.3 Upheld 4. Granulated & Dry Slag Shifting in factor of JSW Steel Ltd. 10,87,096 Cargo Handling Service Para 13 (d) ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on handling in COREX I and II by using dumpers); Sl. No.4 - shifting of granulated and dry slag from COREX 1 and II by deploying excavator; Sl. No.7 loading and shifting of pellets from pellet plant to RMHS yard; Sl. No.9 - loading and shifting of pig iron; Sl. No. loading, transportation and unloading of BOF slag from Kargil area to other plants. The Department contended that all these activities fall under Cargo Handling Services as defined under Section 65(23) read with Section 61(105)(zr) of the Finance Act, 1994. The issue stands settled by the following cases: * Signode India Ltd. vs. CCE: 2017 (50) STR 3 (SC) * CCE vs. Manoj Kumar: 2015 (40) STR 35 (All.) * CCE, Ranchi vs. Modi Construction Co.: 2011 (23) S....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and taxability of various activities, no deliberate suppression of facts and mala fide intention can be imputed; therefore, no justification for imposition of penalty. They have shown reasonable cause as required under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. They relied upon Mohan Poddar vs. CCE: 2015 (38) STR 98 (Tri.-Del.). They have also appealed for the excess appropriated amount of Rs. 6,91,075/- requires to be refunded. 3. The learned DR reiterated the findings of the Order-in- Original and Order-in-Appeal. 4. We have heard both sides and perused the records. We find force in the argument of the appellant that the activities undertaken by them at Sl. No.3,4,7,9 and 10 involved only temporary handling of the goods and shifting them ....