TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 589X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce tax against the appellant by treating their activities as Business Auxiliary services covered by Section 65(105)(zzb) read with Section 65(19) of 1994 Act holding that the process carried out by the appellant does not amount to manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act. The order passed by the Addl. Commissioner shows his total ignorance to the Central Excise Law. It appears that the Additional Commissioner, in his anxiety to confirm the service tax demand made in the show cause notice put up before him for adjudication, did not realize that on the basis of this decision in his adjudication order that making of corrugated boxes from craft paper on job work basis does not amount to manufacture, all the corrugated box manufa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aft paper being carried out by the appellant is production of goods not amounting to manufacture and as such, they are providing Business Auxiliary services as defined under Section 65(105)(zzb) of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 65 (19) ibid and accordingly, they would be liable to pay service tax on the job charges being received. On this basis, after issue of show cause notice, the jurisdictional Addl. Commissioner of Central Excise vide order-in-original dated 23.1.2012 confirmed the service tax demand of Rs.16,66,399/- under proviso to Section 73 of the Finance Act along with interest thereon under Section 75 and besides this, also imposed penalty of Rs.5,000/- on them under Section 77 ibid as well as penalty of Rs.200/- pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... granted. Against this order of the Commissioner (Appeals), this appeal has been filed along with stay application. Miscellaneous application, has been filed by the appellant for early hearing of the stay application, as the Department is pressing hard for recovery of the service tax demand and penalty and that since, the appellant has closed down their business activities, it is difficult for them to pay the liabilities created by the department which are without any basis. 2. Though today the matter was listed only for hearing of the miscellaneous application and stay application, but on going through the records, the bench of the view that since a very short issue is involved, the matter can be taken up for final disposal. Accordingly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is of this decision in his adjudication order that making of corrugated boxes from craft paper on job work basis does not amount to manufacture, all the corrugated box manufacturing unit manufacturing corrugated boxes from craft paper would claim that their activity would not attract excise duty. We are also surprised that the Commissioner (Appeals), instead of deciding the appeal on merits, as an Advocate representing the appellant had appeared before him, has chosen to dismiss the appeal by invoking Rule 5 of the Central Excise (Appeal) Rules, which pertain to the production of additional evidence. Considering the reply to the show cause notice and hearing the appellant when the original adjudicating authority had passed an ex parte order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
