2013 (12) TMI 733

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... h, SDR, for the Respondent. ORDER Learned Counsel Shri Asthana submits that activity of carrying out job work was considered by Revenue as "manpower supply". Such a misconception can be over-ruled by reading of the agreement at page 48 of the appeal folder which explains terms of agreement between the parties made on 2-3-2004. The agreement categorically show that appellant was to carry out the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ts that while object of the agreement at page 48 was to provide skilled labour for carrying out the activity and statutory liability under labour law was of the appellant in terms of the Clause 8, the appellant had employed labour and such act comes within the purview of manpower supply. 3. Heard both sides and perused the records. We have gone through the finding of adjudicating authority a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... manufacture. Had that been the objective, the appellant would have ceased to operate after supply of manpower. But that was not so. While object is clear from Clause 3 of agreement, that appears to be determining factor to decide incidence of tax under law. 5. When we are able to appreciate above fundamental concept, waiving requirement of pre-deposit, we do not propose to keep the appeal p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X