9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 1524X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Singh, AR ORDER Per: V. Padmanabhan: The present appeal is directed against order-in-appeal No. 332-333 (OPD)ST/JPR-II/2013 dated 28.11.2013 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Jaipur-II. 2. The appellant entered into two work orders with M/s Rajasthan State Mines & Minerals Limited (RSMML). The first one was for shifting of iron ore to the place where crusher was located a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contracts were movement of minerals within the mine area and the same cannot be held to be falling under 'Cargo Handling Service. The demand covers the period 01.04.2007 to 31.03.2008. He relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of R. K. Singhvi & Company vs. CCE, Jaipur-II (Final Order No. 56457/2016 dt.28.11.2016), Sainik Mining & Allied Services Ltd. vs. CCEC&ST, BBSR -2008 (9) STR 5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant. In the case of R. K. Singhvi & Company (supra) the Tribunal has relied on various other decision of the Tribunal wherein it has been held that the activities of shifting of minerals from pithead to a specified area located within the mines will not be covered under 'Cargo Handling Service'. The other decisions relied by the appellant have taken the view that similar activities of s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
