TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (11) TMI 26
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....A.K. Nigam, Addl. Commissioner(AR) ORDER Per: B.S.V. Murthy: The appellants are purchasing tubes from the market and by undertaking different processes such as hardening, tempering, upsetting etc., make the tubes/pipes suitable for use by drilling industries. These tubes are provided facilities of threading at the ends and the couplings manufactured by the appellants are used for connecting tub....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es not amount to manufacture. He also submits that after 2005, when the 8 digit tariff was introduced, the Department had demanded service tax from the appellants in respect of the pipes and tubes on which the same processes were undertaken on job work basis for others. As soon as the same proceedings were started, the appellants started paying service tax from 01/08/2005 onwards and for the earli....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 3. The learned AR submits that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is already under challenge and further the issue as to whether the Department collects service tax on such activities is not relevant. What is to be decided in this case is whether the processes undertaken by the appellants amounted to manufacture or not. He draws our attention to the tariff wherein the casing, tubing and dri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uent to 16/06/2005, the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) has attained finality since there is no challenge to the order of the Commissioner(Appeals) by both the sides that appellant is liable to pay service tax on the processes undertaken by them on job work basis for others. The challenge to the Commissioner(Appeals) order is only with regard to the period prior to 16/06/2005. Under these circ....