2024 (9) TMI 1082 - AT - Service Tax

Liability of service tax on job work manufacturing of RMC - Revenue is of the view that job work carried out by the appellant is liable to service tax as the exemption under Notification No.08/2005-ST is not available on the ground that the recipient of service is not paying the Central Excise duty - HELD THAT - It is found that prima facie the activity of process of RMC by the appellant as a job worker appears to be manufacture under Section 2(f), however in both the orders of the lower authorities, it was not clearly discussed that whether the processing of RMC by the appellant is an activity which amounts to manufacture in terms of Section 2(f) of Central Excise Act, 1944. If the activity is found to be manufacture as per Central Excise under Section 2(f) of Central Excise Act, 1944, the same is excluded from the purview of definition of Business Auxiliary Service . In such case the activity will not be taxable, therefore, vital aspect of manufacture needs to be carefully examined. The matter should be remitted back to the adjudicating authority to pass a fresh order in relation to demand of service tax under business auxiliary service. As regard of demand of Rs.15,436/- on GTA service, as conceded by the Learned Counsel the same is upheld - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad heard a case involving the liability of service tax on job work manufacturing of RMC. The appellant argued that manufacturing RMC is not taxable under service tax. The Tribunal found that the lower authorities did not clearly determine if the activity amounts to manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act. The Tribunal remitted the matter back to the adjudicating authority for a fresh order on the demand of service tax under business auxiliary service. The demand of Rs.15,436 on GTA service was upheld. The appeal was allowed for remand to the adjudicating authority. (Case Citation: 2022 (11) TMI 862 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD - Perfect Ready Mix Concrete v. Commissioner of Central Excise & ST, Vadodara)