TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 238
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and Shri Makin. The proposals in SCN-2 and SCN-3 were decided by the impugned order dated 16.4.2019 which is assailed by the assessee. The details are as follows: Tax Appeal No. ST/51048/2019 Makin Developers Private Limited (Appellant) Vs. Commissioner, CGST, Dehradun (Respondent) ST/51049/2019 S.K. Makin, Managing Director (Appellant) Vs. Commissioner, CGST, Dehradun (Respondent) ST/50777/2021 Makin Developers Private Limited (Appellant) Vs. Commissioner, CGST, Dehradun (Respondent) Orders-in-Original Order-in-Original No. 03/Commissioner/DDN/2019 dated 29.01.2019 (Page 74-116 of Volume 1 of Paper Book) ["OIO-1"] Order-in-Original No. 03-04/Commissioner/DDN/2021 dated 28.01.2021 (Page 88-117 of Volume 1 of Paper Book) ["OIO-2"] Show cause notices ("SCNs") Show cause notice dated 3.1.2018 bearing C. No. IV-CE(9) CP/DDN/AE-TPI/Makin Developers RCM/63/16 (Page 119-187 of Volume 1 of Paper Book) ["SCN-1"] 1. Show cause notice dated 16.4.2019 bearing C. No. V (15)Adj./DDN//Makin/10/ 2019 (Page 119 to 122 of Volume 1 of Paper Book) ["SCN-2"] 2. Show cause notice dated 8.1.2020 bearing C. No. V-CGST(15) off/Adj./Makin/Div -DDN/38/2019 (Page 123 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be alleged that the assessee had any intention to evade. Impugned order dated 29.1.2019 confirms demand of service tax made under SCN-1 dated 3.1.2018 covering the period July 2012 to March 2016 which was fully beyond the normal period of limitation. For this reason alone, the impugned order dated 29.1.2019 cannot be sustained and needs to be set aside. 6. Consequently, the appeals no. ST/51048/2019 filed by the assessee and ST/51049/2019 filed by Shri Makin deserve to be allowed. Appeal No. ST/50777/2021 7. This appeal filed by the assessee assails order dated 28.1.2021 passed by the Commissioner in which SCN-2 dated 16.4.2019 (covering the period April 2016 to March 2017) and SCN-3 dated 8.1.2020 (covering the period April 2017 to June 2017) have been decided. These are also on reverse charge basis but the demands were within the normal period of limitation. 8. However, it may be pointed out that both the SCNs were issued after the GST was introduced in 2017 and the Finance Act, 1994 was repealed. So, the assessee could not have taken CENVAT credit. Instead, as per section 142 (7)(b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the appellant would have been entit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....impugned order. The details are as follows: Expenses particulars as per Financial Statements Alleged Taxable Service in the SCNs Service Tax Demand confirmed in the OIO-2 2016- 17 2017- 18 (upto June) Total Proposed demand in SCN-2 and SCN- 3 Demand Dropped in OIO-2 Demand confirmed in OIO-2 Professional service Legal Services 1,02,996 27,224 1,30,220 1,30,220 0 Legal Exp. A/c Piece Work- Labour Supply Manpower Supply Service 1,98,11,927 12,18,716 2,10,30, 643 82,25,098 1,28,05, 545 Piece Work Labour Payment (Deptt. Expenses Particulars as per Financial Statements Labour) Labour Payment Manpower Supply Service Security Service Repair & Maintenance Works Contract Service 1,12,959 40,510 1,53,469 52,485 1,00,984 Freight & Cartage Reimbursement GTA Service 0 1,02, 013 1,02,213 62,696 39,317 Freight & Cartage Hire Charges Travelling & Conveyance A/c TOTAL DEMAND 2,00,27 882 13,88, 463 2,14,16, 345 84,70, 499 1,29,45, 846 Manpower supply service (Rs. 1,28,05,545/-) 12. Learned coun....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions and said that it has been the practice for one person to sign for several workers and collect their payment and pass it to them. This, however, does not mean that the person who so received the payment was the manpower supplier and the assessee was the service recipient. 18. We agree that any amount paid by the assessee to its labourers whether regular or adhoc cannot be called as 'manpower supply service'. However, we find force in the submission of the learned authorised representative for the Revenue. We find that this issue needs detailed verification by the Commissioner to determine if someone acted as the manpower supplier and if so, the amount of service tax payable on his services by the assessee under reverse charge. Needless to say that in view of section 142(7) (b) of the CGST Act, 2017, any amount of service tax so determined and paid by the assessee will have to be refunded to the assessee. The assessee will be entitled to refund as soon as it pays the amount. Works contract service (Rs. 1,00,984/-) 19. This part of the demand was confirmed on the expenses booked by the assessee under the head 'Repair and Maintenance'. Learned counsel for the appellant pr....