9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellants were not paying service tax on the packing charges received by them from M/s Tata Chemicals Ltd. for packing the product common salt, therefore, the SCN dated 22.11.2006 was issued which was culminated into adjudication order whereby demand of service tax under the category of packaging service was confirmed and interest and penalties were also demanded. Being aggrieved by the order in original, appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who after consideration of submission made by the appellant, barring penalty under Section 75A, rejected the appeal, therefore, the present appeal. 2. Ms. Priyanka Kalwani & Sh. Jigar Shah Ld. Counsels appeared on behalf of the appellant. Ms. Priyanka submits that the activity ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... manufacture of Standards of Weights and Measure Rules is not relevant for Section 2(f). In this regard, he takes support from the judgment of this Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Bhopal vs Proctor and Gamble Home Products 2004 (167) ELT 173 (Tri Del), wherein the activity in compliance with the provision of Package Commodity Rules, 1997 was held that the same is not amount to manufacture. 4. We have carefully considered the submission made by both the sides and perused the records. We find that the appellant received salt which is completely manufactured in bulk form. The only activity carried out by the appellant is repacking of bulk salt into retail pack. Such activity cannot be treated as incidental ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ied under the said order. Moreover in such case, the assesse not having license authorizing sale of fertilizer in bulk. Therefore, the packaging of fertilizer is a statutory requirement, for this reason the Hon'ble Tribunal held that activity of packing of fertilizer is amount to manufacture, whereas such conditions are not applicable in case of packing of salt, therefore, the facts in both the cases are entirely different, hence the judgment of New Era (supra) is not applicable in the present case. As regard, the judgment of Eastend Paper Industries Ltd. (supra), the fact is that the assesse was engaged in the manufacture of different types of varieties of printing paper and during the entire process of manufacturing the wrapping paper was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
