https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787191 The article examines whether job-work processes constitute manufacture under Notification No. 214/86-CE and thus cannot be simultaneously treated as an exempted service for Cenvat purposes; where processes are held to be manufacture the legal principle applied is that the Revenue cannot recharacterise the same activity as an exempted service to demand payment under the Cenvat Credit Rules. It notes Rule 6(2) and Rule 6(3) offer accounting alternatives and that Rule 6(3) is an option for the provider, not a compulsory imposition by Revenue. The operative effect concluded is that demands for Cenvat payment in respect of alleged exempted job-work services are unsustainable and the appellate relief for the assessee follows. en-us Thu, 19 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 28 Feb 2026 08:41:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787191 The article examines whether job-work processes constitute manufacture under Notification No. 214/86-CE and thus cannot be simultaneously treated as an exempted service for Cenvat purposes; where processes are held to be manufacture the legal principle applied is that the Revenue cannot recharacterise the same activity as an exempted service to demand payment under the Cenvat Credit Rules. It notes Rule 6(2) and Rule 6(3) offer accounting alternatives and that Rule 6(3) is an option for the provider, not a compulsory imposition by Revenue. The operative effect concluded is that demands for Cenvat payment in respect of alleged exempted job-work services are unsustainable and the appellate relief for the assessee follows. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 19 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787191