TMI Blog2009 (10) TMI 181X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to the latter on the ground that the job worker was not liable to pay the tax by virtue of exemption Notification No. 8/2005-ST, dated 1.3.2005? In the light of the decision of CCE v. DIL Ltd. [2008] 14 STT 210 (Mum. - CESTAT), held that a notification issued under section 93 of 1994 Act would exempt a provider of taxable service from payment of service tax leviable under section 66 but that wo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al through a line of decisions, some of which have been cited by the learned counsel for the respondent. In the case of CCE v. DIL Ltd. [2008] 14 STT 210 (Mum. - CESTAT), a job-worker was exempted under Notification No. 8/2005-ST from payment of service tax provided by him; the job-worker, however, paid the tax and CENVAT credit thereof was availed by the recipient of the service; the Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... section 66 of the Finance Act". It is argued that CENVAT credit could be availed only in respect of service tax leviable under section 66 of the Finance Act. According to the DR, no service tax was leviable on the subject service on account of exemption granted under the aforesaid Notification. This view is mis-conceived, being without regard to section 93 of the Finance Act. The exemption notifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
