SEVEN HILLS CONSTRUCTION Vs. COMMR. OF SERVICE TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants are in appeal along with a stay application against the impugned order wherein the Service Tax demand of Rs. 1,68,54,852/ - has been confirmed against the appellant along with interest and various penalties under the Finance Act, 1994 under the category of Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency Services.

(2.) After hearing both sides, we find that the appeal itself can be disposed of at this stage. Therefore, after granting waiver of the requirement of pre -deposit of Service Tax, interest and penalties, we take the appeal itself for disposal. Brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in providing the service of supply of manpower for running and maintenance of crusher plant and loading of crushed stones in various sizes as required by their clients under an agreement of supply of man power as per rate contract. The appellants have executed the work in lump -sum. The department is of the view that the activity undertaken by the appellants are covered under Manpower Supply Services, therefore impugned demands were confirmed after issuing a show -cause notice to the appellants. On perusal on the case records we find that the appellants are engaged in the activity of crushing of stones and supply the same to their customers as per agreement entered between them on rate contract basis. In the earlier period a similar issue came before the Tribunal in the case of Divya Enterprises v. CCE, Bangalore as reported in : 2010 (19) S.T.R. 370 (Tri. -Bang.) wherein the appellant was executing the work of loading, unloading, bagging, stacking etc. on contract basis. In that case also the department was of the view that the appellant was liable to pay service tax under the category of Manpower Supply Services wherein the Tribunal has held that lump -sum work are given to the appellant for execution and this lump -sum work would not fall under the category of providing of service of supply of manpower. Therefore, following the precedent decision in the case of Divya Enterprises (supra), we hold that the activity undertaken by the appellants does not cover by the manpower supply services. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief, if any.