Opportunity to furnish unsecured-loan confirmations is required before reassessment initiation; proceedings require fresh consideration after taxpayer...
Under-reporting on a first reassessment return attracts penalty, while enhanced misreporting penalty requires proof of a statutory misreporting catego...
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.
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.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4915 
