<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2024 (5) TMI 1341 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753288</link>
    <description>Labour charges for cutting, shearing, bending, punching, welding and allied operations on boiler parts were examined for service tax exposure under Business Auxiliary Services. The activity converted steel plates and sheets into boiler components for further assembly, changing the identity of the goods and amounting to manufacture. As activities amounting to manufacture are excluded from Business Auxiliary Services under Section 65(19) of the Finance Act, 1994, the job-work was treated as outside the service tax levy. The arrangement was also viewed as covered by Notification No. 214/86-CE, under which the principal manufacturer bears the excise obligation. The service tax demand was therefore held unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 May 2024 16:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=754730" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (5) TMI 1341 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753288</link>
      <description>Labour charges for cutting, shearing, bending, punching, welding and allied operations on boiler parts were examined for service tax exposure under Business Auxiliary Services. The activity converted steel plates and sheets into boiler components for further assembly, changing the identity of the goods and amounting to manufacture. As activities amounting to manufacture are excluded from Business Auxiliary Services under Section 65(19) of the Finance Act, 1994, the job-work was treated as outside the service tax levy. The arrangement was also viewed as covered by Notification No. 214/86-CE, under which the principal manufacturer bears the excise obligation. The service tax demand was therefore held unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753288</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>