Rama Enterprises Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Hyderabad)
M/s Rama Enterprises filed Appeal No. ST/20573/2014 against Order-in-Appeal No. 227/2013 (H-IV) S. Tax dated 30.12.2013, while M/s Vinayaka Enterprises filed Appeal No. ST/20575/2014 against Order-in-Appeal No. 231/2013 (H-IV) S. Tax dated 30.12.2013. Since the issues in both appeals were the same, they were heard simultaneously and decided together.
The appellants were providing certain ‘quality works’ in the manufacturing unit of M/s Bagga Distilleries Hyderabad Pvt Ltd., engaged in the manufacture of alcoholic beverages (IML). The Department alleged that the services rendered under the relevant agreement constituted supply of manpower and attracted Service Tax under the category of ‘Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency Services’ under Section 65(105)(k) read with Section 65(68) of the Finance Act, 1994.
The appellants contended that the Contract Deed covered specified quality work, including washing activities, stacking in godowns and cleaning of washing, bottling, blending and surrounding areas, using manpower employed by the appellants. According to them, consideration was based on the work carried out and not on the number of persons employed. They also submitted that they were responsible for fixed deliverables and that the manpower remained under their control and supervision.
The Tribunal examined the Contract Deed and found that the agreement was for providing specified ‘quality work’ and not for supplying manpower to M/s Bagga Distilleries Hyderabad Pvt Ltd. The Tribunal noted that payment was based on the work carried out rather than the number of persons employed and that the manpower worked under the control and supervision of the appellants.
