Job work on materials is not technical inspection and certification without inspection, testing, or certification evidence.

Job work consisting only of bending materials sent by research establishments does not amount to technical inspection and certification service unless there is inspection or examination of the goods, process or material followed by certification that specified standards are met. On the facts noted, there was no evidence of testing, inspection or issuance of any certificate, and a scientific officer's certificate stated that the materials were sent only for bending work. A service tax demand also cannot be sustained on technical testing and analysis when that category was not proposed in the show-cause notice and no finding was recorded on it. The stated legal point is that tax liability must match the specific taxable category supported by the notice and evidence.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the assessees' activity of bending job work on materials sent by research establishments amounted to technical inspection and certification service liable to service tax; (ii) whether the Revenue could sustain the demand on the alternative footing of technical testing and analysis service when that basis was not proposed in the show-cause notice.

Issue (i): Whether the assessees' activity of bending job work on materials sent by research establishments amounted to technical inspection and certification service liable to service tax.

Analysis: Technical inspection and certification under Section 65(108) of the Finance Act, 1994 requires inspection or examination of goods, process, material or immovable property followed by certification that they meet specified standards. The materials were entrusted to the assessees only for bending job work, and there was no evidence of testing, inspection, or issuance of any certificate to the customer. A certificate from the Scientific Officer also stated that the materials were sent only for bending job and not for testing.

Conclusion: The activity did not fall within technical inspection and certification service, and no service tax liability arose on that basis.

Issue (ii): Whether the Revenue could sustain the demand on the alternative footing of technical testing and analysis service when that basis was not proposed in the show-cause notice.

Analysis: The demand could not be upheld under Section 65(106) of the Finance Act, 1994 because the show-cause notice did not propose levy under that category and the authorities below had recorded no finding on it.

Conclusion: The alternative basis was unavailable and could not support the demand.

Final Conclusion: The assessee was not liable to service tax on the facts found, and the Revenue's appeal failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Service tax liability must be confined to the taxable category specifically established by evidence and proposed in the show-cause notice; an activity amounting only to job work without inspection, examination, or certification does not constitute technical inspection and certification service.

---