2011 (4) TMI 918 - AT - Service Tax

Manpower Supply - Waiver of pre-deposit - Application for stay - Held that - There was no formal agreement between the appellant-trust and the sugar factory prior to 2.6.2005. The impugned demand of service tax is partly for the period prior to 2.6.2005, for which period, no evidence whatsoever, has been adduced by the assessee to show that their activity did not constitute manpower supply service. Assessee has come forward with an offer to pre-deposit of Rs.10 lakhs & has also produced copies of the accounts of the trust for the year ended 31.3.2010 indicating that there was an amount of Rs.13.295.92 as excess of expenditure over income as on 31.3.2010 and the cash and bank balances with the trust total to only Rs.6,40,679.59 but reliance placed by the appellant on these records do not disclose the latest financial status of the trust. We do not know whether the trust has been able to improve their bank balances and their general financial position over the year from 1.4.2010. Direct the appellant to pre-deposit an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- within four weeks and report compliance on 6.6.2011.

Summary

Issues:
Prayer for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in service tax and penalty for the period from 16.6.2005 to 25.6.2007 under 'Manpower Supply' service.

Analysis:
The appellant, a trust registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act, entered into an agreement with a sugar factory for cutting and transporting sugar cane grown by members and non-members of the factory. The agreement specified that the trust would be responsible for cutting and transportation of cane up to the factory gate, with the factory providing necessary equipment and laborers. The trust was to follow the factory's instructions and the plan for cutting was the factory's responsibility. The consideration for services included advances and a provision for tax payment. The appellant contended that the activities did not constitute 'Manpower Supply' service, citing a stay order and favorable appeal orders. The Revenue argued that the trust was supplying manpower to the factory as the laborers were under the factory's control. The Tribunal noted conflicting interpretations of the agreement and the pending appeal of the stay order case. It observed a lack of evidence for the period before the agreement's date and the appellant's financial status. The appellant offered to pre-deposit Rs.10 lakhs, but the Tribunal found it insufficient and directed a pre-deposit of Rs.15,00,000 within four weeks.

This judgment addressed the issue of waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in service tax and penalty under 'Manpower Supply' service. The Tribunal analyzed the agreement between the appellant trust and the sugar factory, focusing on the responsibilities outlined, control over laborers, and consideration for services. The appellant's argument, supported by previous orders, clashed with the Revenue's stance that the trust was supplying manpower to the factory. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of evidence for the pre-agreement period and the appellant's financial position. Despite the appellant's offer to pre-deposit Rs.10 lakhs, the Tribunal deemed it insufficient and directed a higher pre-deposit amount of Rs.15,00,000 within a specified timeframe for compliance.