9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 492X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng, heat treatment, shot blasting, as a result of which, a part of scaffolding item ‘Handle’ emerges, would amount to manufacture. Therefore, the activity of the appellant cannot be treated as Business Auxiliary Services (production of goods not amounting to manufacture). Moreover, even if, it is treated as service, when it is not denied that the job-work goods were returned by the appellant to the principal manufacturer, the exemption under Notification No.8/2005-ST dated 1.3.2005 cannot be denied on the ground that there is no evidence that the goods produced were used by the principal manufacturer in or in relation to the manufacture of final products. In view of this, the impugned order is not sustainable. The same is set aside - Decide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 77 and 78 ibid. The service tax demand was for the period 2006-07 to 2009-10.The show cause notice was adjudicated by the Addl. Commissioner vide order-in-original dated 30.03.12 by which the above mentioned service tax demand was confirmed against the appellant along with the interest and besides this, penalties were imposed under Section 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. Though before the Addl. Commissioner, the appellant pleaded that they were availing the exemption under notification no.214/86-CE and in this regard undertaking to use the job work goods in the manufacture of final products had been given by the principal manufacturer M/s. Dev Arjuna Cast Forge Pvt. Ltd., who had cleared the final products on payment of duty and, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have not been used by the principal manufacturer in the manufacture of final products on which the duty has been paid and have wrongly denied the benefit of exemption under notification no.8/2005-ST dated 1.3.2005, that during the period of dispute, the appellant s client- M/s. Dev Arjuna Cast Forge Pvt. Ltd., who is the principal manufacturer, was manufacturing an item named Lever Nut , which is a scaffolding item for supply to M/s. L T Ltd., that a part handle for this scaffolding item was got manufactured on work basis by the principal manufacturer through the appellant out of the rounds supplied by them, that the appellant was performing the processes of cutting, bending and threading on the rounds and also some finishing process ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rounds supplied by them. It is not disputed that the appellant subjected those rounds to the process of cutting, bending, threading and finishing processes like shot blasting, heat treatment, etc. It is also not disputed that the appellant had intimated the department about availment of exemption under notification no.214/86-CE and also the principal manufacturer had given an undertaking under this exemption notification to use the job work goods in the manufacture of finished products which would be cleared on payment of duty. From these facts, it is clear that the department itself has accepted the appellant s activities as manufacture. Moreover subjecting the rounds to the process of cutting, bending, threading, heat treatment, shot bla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
