9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 963X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dual expenses can not be considered to be falling under one heading i.e. ‘Mining Services’. This is our prima-facie view. This our prima-facie view is fortified by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of R.K. Transport Company (2012 (3) TMI 271 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI). On perusal of the circular which has been relied upon by the adjudicating authority, we also find that the said circular specific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es imposed. 2. The adjudicating authority confirmed the above demand on the ground that the appellant has not discharged the differential service tax liability under the Mining Services despite they are registered with the department. 3. Learned counsel would submit that this objection is raised by the audit Section on the audit of records for the period 01.06.2007 to 31.03.2008. He would ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e other hand would submit that the contract which has been entered by the appellant with GMDC Limited is a single contract and there is no bifurcation or vivisection of various amounts to be paid to the contractor. It is also his submission that when the contract is for Mining Service the CBEC circular dated 12.11.2007 will apply in full force and appellant, even if he bills separately, has to b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... various places. The dispute is regarding, whether this transportation activity would fall under Mining Services or not. We find that the adjudicating authority, in his impugned order at Paragraph No. 13, has specifically stated that GMDC Limited had subsequently agreed to permit the noticee to issue separate invoices for excavation and loading of lignite, transportation or unloading of lignite/lim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
