2018 (2) TMI 147

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri K.P. Muralidharan, AC (AR) - For the Respondent ORDER Per: Bench The facts of the case are that appellants were doing powder coating on the aluminium channels / frames supplied by the customers. Department took the view that this activity would be in the nature of production or processing of goods on the part of the client and hence would fall within the ambit of 'Business Auxi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o.41649/2017 dt. 10.08.2017 [in Appeal ST/271/2008] of this Bench. 3. On the other hand, Ld. A.R supports the impugned order. 4. Going through the facts, we find that the Ld. Advocate is correct in his assertion that the matter has indeed been decided in favour of the appellant in the decisions cited by him. In fact, this very Bench in the case of Hitech Industrial Lining Pvt. Ltd. (supra) v....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y the learned counsel in the case of Auto Coats (supra) has force in this aspect, which is reproduced under:- "3. I have carefully considered the facts of the case and the submissions made by both 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 variou....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 16.6.2005 to include the production or processing of goods for, or on behalf of, the client. Thus, the activity of the appellant has become taxable with effect from 16.6.2005. On perusal of records only one invoice falls beyond the period of 16.6.2005 upon which the service tax levy has to be sustained, which we hereby do. In respect of demand prior to the period 16.6.2005, for the discussions ma....