2008 (2) TMI 168 - AT - Service Tax

Activities of bottling packaging and labelling of liquor - whether bottling of liquor amounts to manufacture of liquor or only packaging so as to attract the service tax - activities carried on by the appellant can be dissected in a manner that both excise duty as well as service tax are paid - issue is highly debatable and therefore we are of the view that the benefit should go in favour of the appellants and the requirement of pre deposit therefore should be dispensed with.

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether the activities carried out by the appellants are covered by the manufacturing process to be exempt from service tax.

Analysis:
The appeals were heard concerning the point of stay, with the appellants seeking a waiver of the pre-deposit requirement. The main issue revolved around determining if the activities conducted by the appellants fell within the scope of the manufacturing process, thereby excluding them from the service tax liability. The appellant's counsel heavily relied on a judgment from the Madhya Pradesh High Court involving M/s. Som Distilleries Pvt. Ltd., emphasizing the applicability of this precedent.

On the contrary, the Revenue argued that while M/s. Som Distilleries Pvt. Ltd. was primarily involved in bottling country liquor, the appellants in this case were engaged in additional activities such as packaging and labeling, which could be considered as taxable services under the Finance Act, 1994. The Revenue supported its stance by referencing another decision from the Madhya Pradesh High Court involving M/s. Vindhyachal Distilleries Pvt. Ltd. The Tribunal acknowledged the conflicting opinions in these cases and noted that the Madhya Pradesh High Court had referred the matter to a larger Bench in the case of M/s. Great Galleon Limited. The central question was whether bottling of liquor constituted manufacturing or merely packaging, impacting the applicability of service tax.

The Departmental Representative for the Revenue contended that the appellant's activities could be segmented to attract both excise duty and service tax. While theoretically plausible, the Tribunal found the issue to be highly debatable. Consequently, the Tribunal favored the appellants, ruling in their favor by dispensing with the requirement of pre-deposit. As a result, the Tribunal granted a full waiver of the pre-deposit of duty and penalty, allowing the stay petition and permitting the party to request an early listing of the appeal following the resolution of the case involving M/s. Great Galleon Limited by the Madhya Pradesh High Court.