2017 (7) TMI 688

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... provided the earth moving equipment to M/s. Purti Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. on hire basis at a fixed monthly charges. The respondent is not under obligation to carry out the activity of Site Formation Services in the premises of the service recipient. In this fact it is clear that at the most the service is of supply of tangible goods for use and not fall under the service of Site Formation - the activity involved in the present case is of hiring of equipment on a monthly fixed rental. Therefore the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has correctly and legally held that the service does not fall under Site Formation Services - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.
Shri Ramesh Nair, Judicial Member And Shri Raju, Technical Member Shri M.P. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ents and they do not have responsibility for carrying out the work of "erection, demolition, etc." therefore their activity confined to supply of earth moving equipment hence their service cannot be classified under "Site Formation and Clearance, Excavation and Earthmoving and Demolition". 4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the records. 5. On perusal of contract between the respondent and the recipient of services, we find that the respondent have merely provided the earth moving equipment to M/s. Purti Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. on hire basis at a fixed monthly charges. The respondent is not under obligation to carry out the activity of "Site Formation Services" in the p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ments in the manner he likes. The consideration received by the service provider is only the rental charges for allowing the client to make use of the equipments. The contract between Purti and appellant was purely that of hiring of JCBs, Loader and Tippers. Even the bills raised by the appellant on Purti are for monthly hire charges as per mutually agreed upon rates, which will substantiate the fact that the appellant had no role to play in the actual operations carried out by Purti in their factory with the use of those equipments. So, it cannot be said to have rendered the services of Excavation, Earthmoving, Demolition, Clearance only because the equipments necessary for the said activities were rented out to Purti. In view of this, I h .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X