9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 590X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id charges. Scope of SCN - HELD THAT:- The impugned order is beyond the show cause notice and the Order-in-Original because in the show cause notice as well as in the Order-in-Original it has not been stated that the appellant has recovered service tax from the Markfed and not deposited the same to the Government Exchequer in terms of the provisions in Section 73(A) of the Act. This finding of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) is not sustainable in law as the same is beyond the show cause notice and the Order-In-Original and further alleged services for loading and unloading Taucks/LCV are not covered under manpower recruitment or supply agency as provided in Section 65(68) of the Finance Act, 1994. Conclusion - i) The demand for service tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted 31.12.2012 confirmed the services tax amounting to Rs. 2,14,687/- along with interest and also imposed penalty under Section 77 & 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) vide his Order-in-Appeal partially accepted the appeal by confirming the demand of Rs. 81,282/- along with interest and penalty. Hence, the present appeal. 3. As appellant has pleaded his inability to engage a counsel on account of his poor condition, the Bench requested Ms. Krati Singh, Advocate to act as amicuscurie for which she agreed. 4. Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed beyond the show cause notice a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her hand, Ld. AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, we find that the appellant is only supplying the labour on daily basis and also for loading & unloading to Markfed but he does not fall under the definition of Manpower Recruitment Agency as provided in Section 65(68) of the Finance Act, 1994 and therefore not liable to pay any service tax on the said charges. 7. Further, we find that the impugned order is beyond the show cause notice and the Order-in-Original because in the show cause notice as well as in the Order-in-Original it has not been stated that the appellant has recovered service tax from the Markfed and not deposited th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
