TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (8) TMI 837
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....am Punnose, Advocate for the Appellant Shri K.P. Muralidharan, AC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Per Bench The issue involved is whether the appellants are liable to pay service tax under Business Auxiliary Service with effect from 10.9.2004 for the activity of rubber linings of pipes and fittings supplied to M/s. Kudremukh Iron and Ore Company Ltd. and related works. 2. Though the appellants ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 3. On behalf of the appellant, learned counsel Ms. Minchu Mariam Punnose submitted that the department has raised the demand from the period 10.9.2004 and with effect from such date, the definition of business auxiliary service was amended by including the words production of goods on behalf of the clients . Such job work carried out by the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sting the liability with respect to this invoice. She pleaded that the demand prior to the period from 16.6.2005 may be set aside as well as penalties imposed. 4. The learned AR Shri K.P. Muralidharan reiterated the findings in the impugned order. 5. Heard both sides. 6. On perusal of the amendment brought out in the definition of Business Auxiliary Service with effect from 10.9.2004 as well as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oth sides. The appellants undertook the activity of power coating, bending, drilling etc. of components and machinery parts for a consideration. It cannot be said that they had undertaken the various activities on behalf of any other person. They had undertaken the activities themselves for a fee. It was only with effect from 16-6-2005 that such activities undertaken by a person for another was br....