TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 837
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e periods October 2013 to March 2014 and April 2015 to September 2015) and interest of Rs. 154/- pertaining to FY 2016-17. 2. The facts of the case are that the Appellant is engaged in undertaking job work for M/s Wave Distilleries & Breweries Ltd (M/s Wave) and other manufacturers of liquor. The activities undertaken by the Appellant majorly include repacking of old bottles, repackaging of glass bottles, barcode sticking, cleaning of bottles and other activities forming part of the manufacturing cycle of liquor. 2.1. During the period from October 2013 to March 2015, the Appellant, under a bona fide belief, claimed exemption from payment of Service Tax on the aforesaid activities under Serial No. 30(c) of Notification No. 25/2012-ST which exempts following services- 30. Carrying out an intermediate production process as job work in relation to - (c) any goods on which appropriate duty is payable by the principal manufacturer' Thereafter, pursuant to Notification No. 6/2015-ST dated 01.03.2015, whereby the said exemption stood withdrawn w.e.f. 01.04.2015, the Appellant accepted the changed legal position and duly discharged the applicable Service Tax on t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion under any Central or State Act but does not include nil rate of duty or goods fully exempt from duty. Liquor manufactured by the principal manufacturer is admittedly subject to State Excise Duty. Therefore, any intermediate production process undertaken as job work in relation to the manufacture of such liquor squarely falls within the scope of the aforesaid exemption. This legal position has also been acknowledged by the Respondent in the concluding part of paragraph 4.3 at page 3 of the Order-in-Appeal. iii. The Appellant was entrusted with various operations performed at different stages of the manufacturing cycle of liquor, majorly including repacking of old bottles, repackaging of glass bottles, barcode sticking, cleaning of bottles etc. Each of these activities facilitated or completed a particular stage in the production, finishing and marketability of the final product. The activities undertaken by the Appellant either formed - part of the process resulting in manufacture or finishing of the article - or operations essential to such process. Accordingly, the activities undertaken by the Appellant constitute an intermediate production....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....incipal manufacturer, employed its own labour and received consideration on a per box/per bag basis is wholly irrelevant to the determination of "job work". Once the activities satisfy the requirements of Rule 2(n), the appellant is squarely entitled to exemption under Entry 30(c) of Notification No. 25/2012-ST. Thus, since the activities undertaken by the Appellant satisfy the statutory requirements of an intermediate production process carried out as job work in relation to the manufacture of liquor, the Appellant is fully entitled to the exemption under Serial No. 30(c) of Notification No. 25/2012-ST. Consequently, the impugned demand is wholly unsustainable and liable to be set aside. viii. Since the Appellant duly discharged the applicable Service Tax on the said activities upon withdrawal of the exemption notification, and such payment stands acknowledged by the Department, no demand has been raised for the remaining audit period from April 2015 to June 2017. 3.1. Thus, the Appellant prayed for setting aside the demands of service tax confirmed along with interest and penalties in the impugned order. 4. The Ld. A.R. reiterated the findings n the impugned order.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Central Excise Act, 1944 and hence the activities under taken by the appellant cannot be considered as amounting to 'manufacture' as defined under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act. Accordingly, the Ld. A.R. submitted that the Appellant would not be eligible for the benefit of Serial No. 30(c) of Notification No. 25/2012-ST. We do not agree with the submission of the Ld. A.R. We find that the said issue has been re-examined by Board and issued Circular F.No.249/1/2006-CX-4 dated 27-10-2008, wherein it has been clarified that the term 'manufacturing process' as far as bottling is concerned, has to be understood in the context of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sir Shadila Distillery& Chemical Works case. Accordingly, it has been clarified that packaging and bottling of liquor come within the ambit and sweep of 'manufacture' within the meaning of clause (f) of section 2 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. We find that the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court has relied upon the Bord Circular in the case of Maa Sharda Wine Traders Vs UOI, 2009(22) STT 105(MP) held that the manufacturing process does not necessarily mean that it has to be excisable goods, but, it would in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Central Excise Act inasmuch as the said definition by its import excludes the manufacturing process under the Central Excise Act from the net of service tax. (vi) The Circular F. No. 249/1/2006 - CX, dtd. 27th Oct., 2008 issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs clarifies the position that the term 'manufacturing process' as far as bottling is concerned, has to be understood in the context of the decision of the Apex Court and keeping that in view, has taken it out of net of service tax and the said circular is in consonance with the decision rendered by the Apex Court in Sir Shadilal Distillery & Chemical Works, Mansurpur (supra). (vii) The process of manufacture as defined under Section 2(14) of the 1915 Act falls within the ambit and sweep of Section 2(f)(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and, therefore, there can be no levy of service tax on manufacture in view of the clear postulate under Section 65(76b) of the Finance Act, 2005. To elaborate: the fundamental concept of manufacture as engrafted under Section 2(14) of the 1915 Act cannot be regarded as alien to the definition of 'manufacture' under Section 2(f)(i) of the Central Excise Act as has be....