2014 (9) TMI 115 - AT - Service Tax

Waiver of pre deposit - GTA service - non issuance of consignment notes - demand confirmed within the category of Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency Service - Held that - The Commissioner (Appeals) observed that demand under GTA service is not acceptable as no consignment note was issued. Prima facie, we find that the applicant hired JCB and tippers and provided transport services for transporting the coal within the BHEL unit. There is no material available that they have supplied manpower. applicant has made out a strong prima facie case for waiver of predeposit of entire dues and accordingly we grant waiver of predeposit of entire dues and stay recovery thereof during the pendency of the appeal - Stay granted.

Summary

Issues:
1. Tax demand under 'Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency Service' for shifting and stacking coal.
2. Interpretation of the definition of 'Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency Service' in the context of the case.
3. Claim of the applicant falling under GTA service.
4. Granting of waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery during the appeal.

Analysis:

1. The judgment deals with a tax demand of &8377; 18,87,315/- imposed on the applicant for providing services related to shifting and stacking coal under the category of 'Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency Service' for the period 2007-08 to 2009-10.

2. The Tribunal examined the nature of the services provided by the applicant and the contractual arrangements involved. It was noted that the applicant was engaged by another entity, M/s. BHEL Complex Cooperative Labour Contract Society Ltd., for specific services related to coal transportation. The Tribunal observed that the applicant's activities primarily involved the provision of transport services using equipment like JCB and tipper lorries, with no evidence of manpower recruitment or supply.

3. The Tribunal analyzed the definition of 'Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency Service,' which includes providing services for recruitment or supply of manpower. The applicant argued that even if taxable, their services should be categorized under the Goods Transport Agency (GTA) service. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected this argument due to the absence of consignment notes. The Tribunal found that the applicant's services were more aligned with transport services rather than manpower supply.

4. Considering the arguments and evidence presented, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant had a strong prima facie case for waiver of predeposit of the tax dues. As a result, the Tribunal granted the waiver of predeposit and stayed the recovery of the outstanding amount during the pendency of the appeal, allowing the applicant relief from immediate financial obligations.

In summary, the judgment analyzed the nature of services provided by the applicant, the interpretation of relevant service categories, and ultimately granted relief by waiving the predeposit and staying the recovery of the tax dues pending the appeal process.