Just a moment...
We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:
1. Basic
• Quick overview summary answering your query with references
• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
• Detailed report covering:
- Overview Summary
- Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
- Relevant Case Laws
- Tariff / Classification / HSN
- Expert views from TaxTMI
- Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy
• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.
Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
The CESTAT held that the appellants' activity of processing raw materials/forged blastings received from M/s. Varroc Engineering Pvt. Ltd. into 'Gear 4th Platina' amounted to manufacture u/s 2(f) of the Central Excise Act. The processes undertaken imparted a lasting change, resulting in a new product with a distinct identity. Consequently, the demand of service tax alleging the job work to be Business Auxiliary Service was set aside. The CESTAT further held that there was no suppression of facts or intention to evade tax payment by the appellants, as their activity did not attract service tax liability. Thus, invoking the extended period of limitation was incorrect. The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside.