#Manpower Supply

CESTAT Kolkata rules that when a proprietorship supplies manpower to a body corporate, the recipient bears service tax liability under reverse charge - and the department cannot rely on Form 26AS data to resurrect a time-barred demand for FY 2016-17. This clarifies the limits of tax authorities using third-party income records to override return filings after the limitation period has expired, protecting small service providers from retrospective reassessments.

CESTAT Hyderabad ruled that service tax under 'Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency Services' (MRAS) is not applicable to lump-sum work contracts lacking manpower deployment clauses. The decision quashes a Rs. 1.12 crore demand, clarifying that contract terms-not labour deployment-determine tax liability under the Finance Act, 1994.

CESTAT Chennai ruled that a contractual arrangement with output-based payment and contractor control qualifies as job work, exempting it from service tax under manpower supply classifications. The decision underscores the importance of contractual terms in determining tax liability for businesses engaged in similar services.

CESTAT Bangalore holds that services for road maintenance during 2005-2009 are exempt under Section 97 of Finance Act, 2012, and contract labor does not equate to manpower supply.