https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220058 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the tax demands imposed by the Revenue. It held that the appellant's activities did not constitute "production or processing of goods for, or on behalf of, the client" under Business Auxiliary Service, but rather fell under the definition of "manufacture" as per the Central Excise Act. The Tribunal also found the denial of exemption under Notification 08/2005-ST unjustified due to lack of evidence of duty payment by the principal manufacturer, emphasizing that the appellant was eligible for the exemption. en-us Tue, 30 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Jul 2014 11:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220058 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the tax demands imposed by the Revenue. It held that the appellant's activities did not constitute "production or processing of goods for, or on behalf of, the client" under Business Auxiliary Service, but rather fell under the definition of "manufacture" as per the Central Excise Act. The Tribunal also found the denial of exemption under Notification 08/2005-ST unjustified due to lack of evidence of duty payment by the principal manufacturer, emphasizing that the appellant was eligible for the exemption. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 30 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220058