9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 844X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is required to comply with all the statutory laws in respect of employees working for him. According to us, the purchase order placed on the appellant is for giving an output per piece rate basis which is nothing but lump-sum awarded to him and cannot be considered as manpower recruitment agency or supply agency services. Therefore, in view of the decision of this Bench in the case of Manish Enterprises Vs CCE [2016 (1) TMI 620 - CESTAT MUMBAI] and in the case of Shivshakti Enterprises Vs CCE [2015 (12) TMI 682 - CESTAT MUMBAI], the impugned order is unsustainable and set aside. - Decided in favour of appellant with consequential relief - Appeal No. ST/655/11 - Order No.A/86864/16/STB - Dated:- 23-3-2016 - M. V. Ravindran, Member (J) A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed to pay wages of the employees who were detailed to work in the factory premises and appellant is required to comply with all the statutory laws in respect of employees working for him. According to us, the purchase order placed on the appellant is for giving an output per piece rate basis which is nothing but lump-sum awarded to him and cannot be considered as manpower recruitment agency or supply agency services. This view has been taken by this Bench in the case of Manish Enterprises 2016-TIOL-119-CESTAT-MUM. We reproduce the ratio which is in para 6. 6. The undisputed fact in this case is that appellant has carried out job work on behalf of their client i.e. conversion of Aluminum Ingots to Aluminum Castings. The charges for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... perused the sample/specimen of purchase orders of Tata Motors Ltd. We find that Tata Motors Ltd. had agreed to pay consideration to the appellant based upon the number of pieces that would be manufactured by appellant in the factory premises of Tata Motors. We find that the issue is no more res Integra in as much, in case of Bavariya Enterprises Ltd. 2010 (19) STR-370. Tribunal based on laser of contract purchase orders indicated execution of lump sum work as understood by appellant and service recipients. The case is in hand, the appellant as well as the service recipients understood the agreement between them as the lump sum agreement and not for supply of manpower. We find that this bench in the case of Shriram Sao TVS Ltd. 2015 (39) STR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
