https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346779 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, finding that their activities of rubber lining and re-rubber lining constituted job work amounting to processing of goods rather than production on behalf of the client. The Tribunal held that prior to the relevant amendment, such activities were not taxable under Business Auxiliary Service. The demand for the period before the effective date of the amendment was set aside, while the service tax liability for one invoice falling after the amendment was upheld. All penalties imposed were revoked, partially allowing the appeal in favor of the appellant. en-us Thu, 10 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Apr 2018 11:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346779 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, finding that their activities of rubber lining and re-rubber lining constituted job work amounting to processing of goods rather than production on behalf of the client. The Tribunal held that prior to the relevant amendment, such activities were not taxable under Business Auxiliary Service. The demand for the period before the effective date of the amendment was set aside, while the service tax liability for one invoice falling after the amendment was upheld. All penalties imposed were revoked, partially allowing the appeal in favor of the appellant. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 10 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346779