Padam Charan Guman Singh Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax (CESTAT Delhi)
CESTAT Delhi dismissed the appeal filed by Padam Charan Guman Singh against the order confirming a service tax demand of Rs. 12,50,639 for 2008-09 to 2010-11, along with interest and penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Commissioner (Appeals) had upheld the service tax demand, interest and Section 78 penalty while setting aside penalties under Sections 76 and 77.
The dispute concerned whether the appellant had provided “manpower recruitment and supply service” to M/s S.S. Ispat or had acted as a job worker undertaking the manufacturing process. The appellant contended that it operated plant and machinery, deployed its own labour, retained control over the workforce and was paid according to the quantity of finished goods manufactured. It also challenged reliance on his statement recorded under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, disputed the demand based on Form 16A, pleaded limitation and opposed the penalty under Section 78.
The Revenue maintained that the appellant had supplied manpower, had collected service tax from the recipient but failed to deposit it, and relied on the appellant’s statement, investigation records and Form 16A. It also contended that the contract should be read as a whole and that payment on a per-piece or per-MT basis did not alter the nature of manpower supply.
