Dear Sh. Atulji,
Thanks for your views. Further, goods belongs to another includes inputs, can be used by Job-worker, Sh. Kasturiji Sir, came out with the relevant portion of Circular, which is correct as per the query. Now if we peruse both the definition of Job work and manufacture, in job work ‘treatment and process’ is used while in manufacture ‘processing’ which should result in emergence of NEW product, with distinct name, character and use, so can we say that while treatment or processing, if no distinct name, character and use, are satisfied, it is Job work and if treatment or processing results in distinct name, character and use, will be termed as “manufacture”. As semi-finished goods “intermediate” will not satisfy the definition for word “USE”.
The matter may be disputed by the department for point 3 is that, Circular says that job worker can use the inputs of his own for providing the services, but as soon as goods are use it can be treated as either “Mixed” or composite” Supply. There is no clarification on this, as even circular keeping matter open by “Thus, the job worker is expected to work on the goods sent by the principal and whether the activity is covered within the scope of job work or not would have to be determined on the basis of facts and circumstances of each case.”
Moreover, on referring the definition of Service given at Section 2(102) of the CGST Act,2017, it says “anything other than goods”. So as soon as goods are used that particular activity is out of ambit of “service”.
The reply is based on Central excise, which was production based while GST is supply based Act. Yet many things are to be settled and same are also open, I do not find harmony and matter is debatable, and if it is debatable it can be disputed. Therefore, the same was called for the insights of our experts.
Thanks,
With Regards