https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238456 The Tribunal found in favor of the appellant, ruling that the processes undertaken on tubes did not amount to manufacture for excise duty liability. The Commissioner(Appeals) had already determined the liability for service tax post-16/06/2005, which was not challenged. As the dispute only concerned the period pre-16/06/2005, the Tribunal held that unless it was shown that processes differed when done on job work basis, the Department lacked a prima facie case. Consequently, the Tribunal waived the predeposit and stayed the recovery during the appeal's pendency. en-us Mon, 22 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Oct 2013 08:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238456 The Tribunal found in favor of the appellant, ruling that the processes undertaken on tubes did not amount to manufacture for excise duty liability. The Commissioner(Appeals) had already determined the liability for service tax post-16/06/2005, which was not challenged. As the dispute only concerned the period pre-16/06/2005, the Tribunal held that unless it was shown that processes differed when done on job work basis, the Department lacked a prima facie case. Consequently, the Tribunal waived the predeposit and stayed the recovery during the appeal's pendency. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 22 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238456