TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (10) TMI 573
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e issued to the appellant for the period April 2010 to March 2015 and April 2015 to June, 2017 vide dated 17.11.2017 and 18.04.2018 respectively. 3. The facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in manufacturing of liquor and have facility to blenders and distillery packing and required manpower in Rajasthan. Since the appellant does not own a brand name whereas it sell liquor. 3.1 In the State of Rajasthan, a brand name is required and Rajasthan State Privilege Corporation Ltd (RSBCL) recognize a brand name. The appellant entered into an agreement with M/s Allied Blenders & Distillery Pvt Ltd (ABDPL) to manufacture and sale liquor under their brand name on revenue sharing basis. The necessary raw material is procured by the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h-Tech Bottling Private Limited 2022(8) TMI 62 CESTAT Kolkata and M/s. Daurala Sugar Works Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Meerut 2018(12) TMI 793-CESTAT Allahabad. Therefore, it is prayed that appellant is not liable to pay service tax. 4. On the other hand learned A.R. for the Revenune, drew our attention to the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Carlsberg India Pvt Ltd vs. Union of India 2016 (44) STR 349 Delhi to say that the activity undertaken by the appellant being a process of manufacture but the same is not excluded from the payment of service tax in terms of Notification No.25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012. 5. Heard the parties considered submissions. 6. We find that the issue involve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1 of 1944) or any process amounting to manufacture of alcoholic liquors for human consumption, opium, Indian hemp and other narcotic drugs and narcotics on which duties of excise are leviable under any State Act for the time being in force." 23. A Negative list regime of Service Tax came to be introduced only by FA 2012 with effect from 1st July 2012. Prior to 1st July 2012, under Section 65 (19) of FA 1994 "business auxiliary service", a taxable service, included within its ambit production or processing of goods for, or on behalf of the client but did not include any activity that amounts to "manufacture" of excisable goods. However with effect from 1st July 2012, "any process amounting to manufacture or production of goods" whic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ice' within the meaning of Section 65B (44) of the FA 1994. For these reasons, the challenge to the validity of Section 113(A) (1) of the FA, 2009 by which Section 65(19) of the FA 1994 stood amended and whereby the expression 'business auxiliary service' did not exclude the activity of manufacture of alcoholic liquor for human consumption, when undertaken by one entity for another, is negatived. 39. There is a marked change in the position that the FA 2015 and the amendment it brought about to Section 65B of the FA 1994. Under Section 107 (f) of FA 2015, Clause (40) of Section 65B of FA 1994 would no longer contain the word 'alcoholic liquors for human consumption‟. Section 109 (2) of FA 2015 further substitu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndertaking manufacture for another. The changes brought about in 2015 was intended to capture the latter aspect which is unique to job work for the purposes of levy of service tax. In his budget speech on 28th February 2015, the Finance Minister explained, inter alia, that service tax was "to be levied on service by way of carrying out any processes as job work for production or manufacture of alcoholic liquor for human consumption" It is significant that the Respondents in their written submissions have confirmed that "service tax is only being imposed on the value of the services provided by the job worker/contract manufacturer and not on the whole sale price of alcohol." Conclusion 50. Consequently, in the present case ....