TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (6) TMI 699
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Advocates for the Appellant Shri P. Ganesan, Superintendent (AR) for the Respondent ORDER RAMESH NAIR : The present appeal has been filed by M/s S.A. Engineering Works being aggrieved with the impugned Order-in-Appeal No. Commr(A)/74/VDR-II/2011 dated 22.02.2011 passed by the Learned Commissioner (Appeals), whereby the demand of service tax of Rs. 1,27,404/- for the period July 2005 to Febru....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h the OIO appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who vide impugned order-in-appeal dated 22.02.2011 rejected the appeal of appellant and upheld the Order passed by the Adjudicating authority. Hence the present appeal filed by the Appellant. 3. Ms. Shamita Patel with Mr. Rahul Gajera Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant submits that during the period July 2005 to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ether Job work carried out by the assessee can be said to be manpower supply services is covered by the decisions of Tribunal in Nishkarsh Industrial Services vs. CCE 2022 (9)TMI 901-CESTAT. She also placed reliance on the following decisions. (i) Donypolo Udyog Limited vs. CCE & ST -2023(3)TMI539-CESTAT New Delhi (ii) Bhagyashree Enterprises vs. CCE 2017(3)GSTL 515(Tri. Mumbai) (iii) Dhanas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ying out such activities. The workmen deployed by the appellant for carrying out such activities were under the supervision and control of the appellant. The ultimate manufacturer, who entrusted the job to the appellant was no way concerned with the workmen deployed by the appellant. It is also noticed that over and above paying the amount for manufacturing activities undertaken by the appellant o....