Page 81 - GSTL_23rd April 2020_Vol 35_Part 4
P. 81

2020 ]    ADITYA ENTERPRISES v. COMMISSIONER OF CUS. & C. EX., MEERUT-II  407
                       [Order per : Anil Choudhary, Member (J)]. - The appellant, M/s. Aditya
               Enterprises - Proprietor, Shri Jitendra Kumar Sahni was doing various jobs since
               2006-2007 in the factory premises of Century Pulp and Paper, a unit of Century
               Textiles and Industries Ltd. (“CPP” in short) mainly in the nature of handling of
               wood and maintaining cleanliness in specific parts of the factory, maintenance of
               Hydra Pick and carry crane, etc. Such jobs were executed by deploying labour by
               the appellant, for which they raised periodical invoices based on the quantum of
               work handled and not based on the number of workers or labourers involved in
               the particular work. The appellant was advised that no service tax is leviable on
               such works and accordingly, they neither took registration under the provisions
               of Service Tax nor they charged service tax in their bills. The principal - CPP is-
               sued  a  letter to the appellant  in December, 2009  stating that on the nature of
               work being done by them for CPP, it appears that service tax is leviable and ac-
               cordingly, directed the appellant to obtain service tax registration, in absence of
               which, their bills for work done will not be entertained from Jan., 2010. Under
               the circumstances, the proprietor, Mr. Jitendra Kumar Sahni obtained service tax
               registration number under the new name and style of ‘R.J.S. Enterprises’ as pro-
               prietor. Thereafter, the same business or work was undertaken under the name
               and style of R.J.S. Enterprises for the principal - CPP, and the appellant started
               paying service tax w.e.f. 1-4-2010 under the category of “Manpower Supply Ser-
               vice”.
                       2.  By letter dated 7-9-2010, the Range Superintendent, Haldwani asked
               for details of turnover and copy of the documents for the periods 2005-2006 till
               31-3-2010 with intent to examine the service tax liability for the past period. By
               reply dated 30-9-2010, the appellant submitted the requisite documents. The ap-
               pellant by letter dated 14-12-2010 requested the Asstt. Commissioner, Central
               Excise Division, Haldwani to intimate outcome of the inquiry undertaken by the
               Department. In reply, by letter C. No. V (17)51/RST/Aditya/HLD/2010, dated
               16-12-2010, the Asstt. Commissioner replied as follows :-
                           “Please refer to your letter dated 14-12-2010 regarding the outcome of the
                       investigation in respect of records of your firm.
                           In this context, it is to intimate that on the basis of the records and docu-
                       ments submitted, and the work done by you as per your contract agreements with
                       M/s. Century Pulp and Papers, Lalkuan of Distt. Nainital, it has been revealed that
                       the most of the services provided do not appear to be covered in any of the taxable
                       services except the work of yard cleaning which is covered under Cleaning Service
                       and the work of Maintenance of hydraulic crane which is covered under the Man-
                       agement. Maintenance and Repair Services but the aggregate value of the same has
                       been found too below the exemption limit of the small service provider to attract
                       service tax liability under the provisions of the Notification No. 6/2005-S.T., dated
                       1-3-2005 as amended.”
                       3.  Subsequently, the appellant received summons from the Superinten-
               dent (Preventive) requiring the appellant to produce documents/information for
               the periods 2006-2007 to 2010-2011. In compliance, the proprietor appeared and
               again submitted the requisite documents/information on 27-9-2011, on which
               date the statement of the proprietor was also recorded. Thereafter, show cause
               notice dated 5-6-2012 was issued relying on the copy of the agreements entered
               by the appellant with the CPP during the years 2006-2007 to 2008, and master
               orders dated 14-3-2008 and 7-7-2009. It appeared to Revenue  as  alleged in the
               show cause notice, that under the various agreements, for jobs, under which ap-
               pellant was actually engaged for supply of manpower, and were so worded to
               avoid the service tax liability. Under the circumstances, the agreements were in
                                    GST LAW TIMES      23rd April 2020      201
   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86