2018 (7) TMI 1011

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri R. Parthasarathy, Consultant For the Appellant Shri R. Subramaniyan, AC (AR) For the Respondent ORDER Per Madhu Mohan Damodhar The facts of the case are that appellants had removed over boulders / over burdens in respect of mines owned by Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd.. Department took the view that these are pre-mining operations and hence would amount to rendering of Site Fo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....over size boulders from crusher area to crusher hopper. He submits copies of work orders in this regard. Ld. Consultant also draws our attention to the decision of Tribunal in Kanak Khaniz Udyog Vs CCE Jaipur-II - 2017 (52) STR 46 (Tri.-Del.) where inter alia, the activities of removal of overburdens has been held to be classifiable only under 'Mining Services'. 3. On the other hand, Ld.A.R sup....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r interference on the ground that appellants having paid service tax were now estopped from denying their liability. This, surely, is not a sustainable conclusion, since it would mean that appellants cannot appeal on merits if they have paid up part or whole of the tax liability as insisted upon by the department, in most cases to buy peace. In any case, the clarification given by the CBEC is ampl....