9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 1048X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Cargo Handling Service. The agreement entered by appellant with M/s. SECL is also clearly for transport of coal. Also, the Commissioner vide several orders has also held that the said service is covered under GTA services. Therefore, the impugned service is not classifiable as Cargo Handling Service as per the decision taken by the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Narayan Builders 2013 (9) TMI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sharma, DR ORDER PER MR. R.K. SINGH : The appellants have filed this Stay Application along with appeal against the Order-in-Original No. COMMISSIONER/RPR/ST/17/2013, dated 31.01.2013 in terms of which service tax demand of ₹ 4,96,51,686/- for the period 01.06.2007 to 31.03.2012 was confirmed along with interest and penalties on the ground that the appellants were loading and u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also held that the said service is covered under GTA. They have also stated that the demand is time barred and the issue stands decided in their favour by Tribunal judgements in the cases of Anupama Coal Carriers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Raipur [2013 (32) STR 41 (Tri.-Del.)] and M/s. Narayan Builders Vs. CCE, Jaipur [2013-TIOL-816-CESTAT-DEL]. 3. The ld. Departmental Representative supported the impu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t M/s. SECL to whom appellants provide the impugned service. We find that in the case of M/s. Narayan Builders (supra), Tribunal held that mere handling of coal and movement of said goods from railway wagon to the site of thermal power station through the motor vehicle or any other means of transportation involved in such handling would not constitute Cargo Handling Service. Similarly in the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
