DILIP CONSTRUCTION Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE
LAWS(CE)-2012-1-117
CUSTOMS EXCISE AND GOLD(CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Decided on January 18,2012

Dilip Construction Appellant
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE Respondents




JUDGEMENT

D.N.PANDA,MEMBER (J) - (1.)LEARNED Counsel says that reading of para 9 of the adjudication order demonstrates that the activity carried out by the appellant was within the mining area and the goods transported within mining area cannot be called as cargo handling. This can be appreciated if the sample copy of the contract dated 2 -12 -2003 is examined. Following the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Jharkhand in the case of CCE, Ranchi v. M/s. Modi Construction Company reported in : 2011 (23) S.T.R. 6 (Jhar.) the activity of appellant cannot be called as cargo handling service and Appellant shall succeed. Opposing the contention of the Revenue, learned representative of Revenue says that the activity of the appellant squarely falls under the category of cargo handling service. This can be appreciated reading the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Orissa in the case of Coal Carriers v. CCE, C & ST Bhubaneswar reported in : 2011 (24) S.T.R. 395 (Orissa). He further submits that the appellant's contentions are baseless when they carried out the activity of cargo handling service.
(2.)Heard both sides and perused the record.
(3.)TO call an activity to be cargo handling service there should be an activity of movement of cargo from one place to another place without any internal movement within the mining area. Neither handling service outside the mining area is evident from para 9 of the adjudication order nor destination outside such area has come to record. Therefore, when the factual evidence demonstrates movement of the excavated iron within the mining area from one place to another that operation cannot be called as cargo handling service. Accordingly, appellants succeed in all the three appeals.
4 There is a delay in filing of cross objection for which application for condonation of delay has been filed. Since the appeal has been disposed of in above terms, both cross objection and condonation applications get dismissed. In the result, all the three appeals, CO and COD applications gets disposed of accordingly.



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.