https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265354 Activities carried out inside the factory on a lump-sum job contract, including cutting, punching, drilling and bending of material supplied by the recipient, were part of the manufacturing process before the RG-1 stage and not manpower recruitment or supply agency service. The contract was treated as execution of work rather than supply of labour, and the recipient's description as principal employer did not change the true nature of the arrangement. The exemption and coverage considered under Notification No. 8/2005-ST also supported non-taxability, and taxing the same value again was viewed as impermissible double taxation. The service tax demand was therefore unsustainable. en-us Fri, 24 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Oct 2015 21:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265354 Activities carried out inside the factory on a lump-sum job contract, including cutting, punching, drilling and bending of material supplied by the recipient, were part of the manufacturing process before the RG-1 stage and not manpower recruitment or supply agency service. The contract was treated as execution of work rather than supply of labour, and the recipient's description as principal employer did not change the true nature of the arrangement. The exemption and coverage considered under Notification No. 8/2005-ST also supported non-taxability, and taxing the same value again was viewed as impermissible double taxation. The service tax demand was therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 24 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265354