TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 111
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....itment and Supply Agency's Services, Maintenance or Repairs Services and Cleaning Services to M/s. Hindustan Lever Ltd. (HLL) during the period from April 2005 to March 2009. The appellant had registered themselves with Service Tax Department from providing manpower recruitment and supply agency services but in respect of the same and cleaning services they allegedly neither declared the activities in their ST-3 returns filed nor paid proper service tax. Hence Show Cause Notices No. 18/2010 dated 12.4.2010 and No. 29/2010 dated 19.4.2010 were issued demanding service tax of Rs.7,66,382 for the period from 1.4.2005 to 30.9.2008 and Rs.85,532/- for the period from October 2008 to March 2009 under proviso to section 73(1) of the Finance Ac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... if they consisted of a service which gives them their essential character, in so far as this criterion is applicable'. Hence, even where the manpower supplied by the appellant undertook various types of works, as they were supplied under common agreements on wages per day per manpower basis, the service provided by the appellant only merited classification under the category of 'Manpower supply' which is supported by the decisions of the Hon'ble Tribunal in the cases of Shree Chaitanya Educational Committee Vs. CCE [2019 (22) GSTL 67]and Greatship India Ltd. Vs. CCE [2015 (37) STR 533] holding that as per the principles of classification enshrined in Section 65A(2)(b) of the Finance Act, 1994, composite services, consisting of a combinatio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3/- was liable to be paid by the appellant for the impugned period and therefore also subsequently the department due to a change of mind cannot allege suppression for the reason of which also the demand confirmed under the cleaning services for the period from April, 2005 to March, 2008 under the extended time limit is not proper or correct which view is supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of CCE Vs. Yashwant Industries [2014 (313) ELT 667]. 5. Learned AR Shri Anoop Singh, appeared and argued for the department. He reiterated the findings in the impugned order and prayed that the appeal may be dismissed. 6. Heard both sides. Classification of services is a matter relating to chargeability and the burden of p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ertaking the different services listed above. Further the question is whether the contract was a composite one and cannot be vivisected into different services. The issue involves a mixed question of fact and law. The answer to the questions will help classify the nature of service being provided. 8. We however find that no test has been applied to determine the relationship of the service provider and the workmen being one between master and servant (Maintenance and Repair) or between supplier and recipient of service being between principal to principal, (Manpower Recruitment). The contract between the parties have also not been examined in detail and the relationships between the parties brought out nor has the intention or essential ....