COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX Vs. EMTA COAL LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the revenue under Sec. 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (the Act) challenging the order passed by the Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, East Zonal Bench, Kolkata, (Tribunal) in Service Tax Appeal No.277/2012 dtd. 30/11/2023.

(2.) From the above it is clear that handling and transportation of coal/mineral from pithead to a specified location within the mine/factory or for transportation outside the mine was included. Therefore, it is clear that the activity of handling of goods, including of unloading and loading thereof being part of the mining services to be rendered under the agreements entered into by the assessee cannot be bifurcated under different heads for the purpose of demanding service tax. Identical issue was considered by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise -versus- Manoj Kumar reported in 2015 (40) S.T.R. 35 (All.), wherein it was held that the activity of loading, unloading, packing, unpacking, stacking, re-stacking and shifting of sugar bags from mill floor to godown or from one godown to another godown within the factory is not covered in cargo handling service as there being no activity of loading or unloading for movement outside the factory on public road or ship or aeroplane or trucks for any destination.

(3.) The Court noted that in common parlance 'cargo' means load, which is to be carried by ship, aeroplane, rail or truck and handling of transportation of goods, by itself unless it is an organized activity, which is connected with carrying cargo is involved would not fall within the definition of cargo handling service.