Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax Vs Bhaiya Lal Infrastructure Pvt Ltd. (CESTAT Delhi)
Summary: The appeal was filed by the department against the Order-in-Appeal dated 29.01.2018, whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) had set aside the service tax demand confirmed against Bhaiya Lal Infrastructure Pvt Ltd. The respondent-assessee, a partnership firm providing services to projects of M/s. Northern Coalfield Ltd., was alleged to have provided Cargo Handling Services by deploying tipping trucks for loading coal into contractor’s tipping trucks using contractor’s pay loaders. For the period April 2008 to March 2013, the department worked out total receipts of Rs.17,96,07,795/-, of which Rs.16,14,98,657/- was treated as taxable value, and proposed service tax of Rs.1,81,09,138/- through Show Cause Notice No. 99/2013 dated 22.10.2013, along with interest and penalties. The original demand was confirmed by Order-in-Original dated 22.03.2017 but was subsequently set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals).
The department contended that the disputed period included the post-negative-list period from 01.07.2012 to 31.03.2013, when classification of services was no longer relevant for determining taxability. It also challenged the reliance placed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the decision in Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur Vs. Singh Transporters, Civil Appeal No. 7460/2017, and argued that the liability in the circumstances rested upon Northern Coalfield Ltd. The respondent submitted that the activity was essentially transportation of coal by road and that loading and unloading were merely incidental to transportation. Reliance was placed on Singh Transporters Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur, reported as 2012 (27) STR 488 (Tri-Delhi), and Singh Construction Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Jabalpur, reported as 2023 (5) TMI 337-CESTAT New Delhi. The respondent also relied upon Circular No. 186/5/2015 dated 05.10.2015, submitting that a composite service should be treated as a single service based upon its principal service and that Northern Coalfield Ltd. had already discharged the liability under Reverse Charge Mechanism.
