https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456599 CESTAT Ahmedabad held that service tax demand on appellant providing plant facilities for exclusive use by a chemical manufacturer was not sustainable. The tribunal applied precedent from Gujarat Insecticides Limited case, ruling that appellant's activity constituted manufacturing of excisable goods under Central Excise Act, 1944. Since manufacturing activity is excluded from Business Auxiliary Service definition under Section 65(105)(zzg) of Finance Act, 1994, service tax liability did not arise. The original order was set aside and appeal allowed. en-us Mon, 15 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 02 Aug 2024 21:13:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456599 CESTAT Ahmedabad held that service tax demand on appellant providing plant facilities for exclusive use by a chemical manufacturer was not sustainable. The tribunal applied precedent from Gujarat Insecticides Limited case, ruling that appellant's activity constituted manufacturing of excisable goods under Central Excise Act, 1944. Since manufacturing activity is excluded from Business Auxiliary Service definition under Section 65(105)(zzg) of Finance Act, 1994, service tax liability did not arise. The original order was set aside and appeal allowed. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 15 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456599