2026 (4) TMI 1590

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... was paying the service tax under reverse charge mechanism for GTA services etc., is also engaged in coiling of the steel wires supplied by some principal manufacturers like M/s.Lakshmi Machine Works (LMW), M/s.Bharat Heavy Electricals ltd. (BHEL); however, they did not pay the service tax on the job work charges despite collecting job charges. It was also found that the Appellant was availing CENVAT credit of tax paid on various taxable services viz. GTA, Consultancy etc. 2. It is the case of the Revenue that the Appellant did not pay the service tax under 'Business Auxiliary Service' (BAS, for short) till 30.06.2012 and as taxable service from 01.07.2012 by claiming exemption under Notification No.8/205-ST dated 01.03.2015. Further, in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r documents placed along with the Appeal Memorandum. I have also gone through the decisions relied upon during the course of arguments. Upon hearing both sides, I find that the only issue to be decided is, 'whether the demand of 5% / 6% on the job charges under Rule 6 (3) of CCR is justified ?' 4. It is the case of the Appellant that their principal manufacturer i.e., LMW & BHEL, who sent the goods under Rule 4 (5) (a) of CCR, have been paying Excise duty on their finished products; the activity undertook by the Appellant was not mere coiling of steel wires, but also a series of specialized processes carried out on such steel wires received from their principal manufacturers and the job work challans issued in terms of Rule 4 (5) (a) ibi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hri N. Satyanarayana, ld. Assistant Commissioner relied on the findings of the lower authorities. 6. I have carefully considered the rival contentions and upon carefully going through the decided cases relied upon by Ld. Advocate, I find that almost identical issue has been decided in those cases and hence, I am of the view that the issue raised in the present Appeal stands settled as on date. Therefore, I am tempted to follow the ratio laid down in the above decisions since Revenue is unable to distinguish the above case law either on facts or on law. It is apt to reproduce relevant portion of Tribunal's order in Sagittarius Metals Private Ltd. supra which is as under : "6. In the case of Escorts Ltd. v. CCE, Delhi [2004 (171) ....