Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (7) TMI 767

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n and use such quantum and variety of tools and tackles as may be required. Further, the Appellant company as the Principal is not obligated, though Appellant supervised the work of the sub-contractor from time to time. Further, there is no rate specified per workmen to be provided by the sub-contractor - It is also held that as the main contract is for construction activity, undisputedly in the nature of Works Contract service, the sub-contractor having been awarded the part of such work, is also classifiable rightly under Works Contract service. The service in question received by the Appellant is in the nature of Construction service and/or Works Contract service and not Manpower Supply service, under any stretch of imagination - Appe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... chanism. As the Appellant have not discharged Service Tax liability towards Manpower Supply service received by them, it appeared that they have contravened the provisions of the Act read with Rules read with Notification. In the course of enquiry, prior to the issue of SCN, the Appellant had taken the stand that they have awarded work to their sub-contractors for execution of certain work which is in the nature of construction activity involving goods or material to be supplied by them (Principal) and as such by no stretch of imagination, the same can be categorised under the head - Manpower Supply service. However, the Revenue, not being satisfied, issued SCN dated 07.09.2017 for the period under dispute 2012-13 to 2015-16 invoking extend .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ilar demand under Manpower Supply service was raised for the period 01.04.2016 to 30.06.2017. The SCN in that case is adjudicated by the Principal Commissioner vide OIO dated 08.06.2023 whereby, under similar facts and circumstances, the learned Commissioner has been pleased to observe as follows:- (C) A perusal of above details reflect that the job to be executed involved goods for execution of the works and the transfer thereof and the Contractor i.e., the Assessees have to procure supply the required goods for construction of Liquid Berth the Jetty. Said factual matrix reflects that the Contract is a composite one involving components of both the material/goods services and the property in goods involved in the execution of th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tor requires examination, for arriving at the appropriate classification as well as the taxability of such work order. (E) Apart from the above detailed legal matrix of the Construction service rendered by the sub-contractors to the Assessee Contractor, further legal matrix is that the original works pertaining to Government are exempted from levy of service tax under Entry No.14A of Para 1 of the Notification No.25/2012-ST, which states that Services by way of construction, erection, commissioning, or installation of original works pertaining to an airport or port provided under a contract which had been entered into prior to 1st March, 2015 and on which appropriate stamp duty, where applicable, had been paid prior to such date , su .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... g considered the rival contentions and upon perusal of records, we find that from a plain reading of the Work Order, it is evident that the Work Order is not for supply of manpower service, but it is work awarded for construction activity specifying the rate payable for particular quantum of work to be executed. Further, we find that it is not disputed that the sub-contractor has got full liberty to employ such number of workmen and use such quantum and variety of tools and tackles as may be required. Further, the Appellant company as the Principal is not obligated, though Appellant supervised the work of the sub-contractor from time to time. Further, we find that there is no rate specified per workmen to be provided by the sub-contractor. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates