Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2014 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (1) TMI 411 - CESTAT MUMBAIRejection of refund claim - Demand under Business Auxiliary Service - Job work where principal is liable to pay excise duty - Unjust enrichment - Notification 214/86-CE - Held that:- activity undertaken by the appellant is in respect of machining and flame hardening on forgings and castings received from the principal manufacturer. The appellants are working under the provisions of Notification 214/86-CE. In the show-cause notice the fact is admitted. The activity undertaken by the appellant is a part of manufacturing process and the principal manufacturer was paying duty on the goods processed by the appellants. Therefore we find that the appellants are not liable to pay service tax under the Business Auxiliary Service during this period. In respect of unjust enrichment, we find that the appellant admitted the fact that though the amount of service tax was shown in the invoice but not received by them. In view of the above facts, we find the matter requires reconsideration by the adjudicating authority regarding unjust enrichment. The issue & unjust enrichment is remanded back to the adjudicating authority for consideration and to decide afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellant - Decided in favour of assessee.
|