2024 (7) TMI 269

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d the facts of the case are that the Appellant is engaged in the manufacture of different brands of biscuits by using their own infrastructure, labour, staff and machinery in their factory and are holding Central Excise registration. The Appellant approached M/s Parle Biscuits Pvt. Ltd. PBPL for usage of spare manufacturing facility available with them which can be used for manufacturing activity on behalf of PBPL for the said purpose an agreement dated 16.02.2009 termed as "Agreement for Process / Job work" was entered into between the Appellant and PBPL. As per the terms of the agreement dated 16.02.2009, the Appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Biscuits falling under Tariff Item 1704 90 20 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, on....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ount received as EX-GRATIA. Interest was also proposed to be demanded and penalty under Section 78 was also proposed to be demanded. SCN dated 25.02.2016 was issued proposing to demand service tax amounting to Rs.82,54,116/- on the amount received as ex gratia alongwith applicable interest and for imposition of penalty under Section 78. SCN culminated into Order-in-Original dated 10.01.2017. 3. Being aggrieved the Assessee filed appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) and by the impugned order, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the Order-in-Original. Hence the present appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 5. The Appellant's submissions are as under : - (i) that, the EX-GRATIA a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ovisions are not invokable; 6. We find that the issue is no more res integra and is squarely covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of M/s K. N. Food Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise & CGST, Kanpur in Service Tax Appeal No.70737 of 2018 Final Order No.71917/2019 dated 26.11.2019. The relevant paragraphs are reproduced for ready reference :- "4. After hearing both the sides duly represented by Shri H. P. Kanade, learned advocate appearing for the appellant and Shri Shiv Pratap Singh, learned A.R. appearing for the Revenue, we find that the short issue required to be decided in the present appeal is as to whether the receipt of ex-gratia job charges amount by the appellant amounts to providing any servic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the Act. In the present case apart from manufacturing and receiving the cost of the same, the appellants were also receiving the compensation charges under the head ex-gratia job charges. The same are not covered by any of the Acts as described under Section 66E (e) of the Finance Act, 1994. The said Sub-clause proceeds to state various active and passive actions or reactions which are declared to be a service namely; to refrain from an act, or to tolerate an act or a situation, or to do an act. As such for invocation of the said clause, there has to be first a concurrence to assume an obligation to refrain from an act or tolerate an act etc. which are clearly absent in the present case. In the instant case, if the delivery of project ....