TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 231X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ture. - appellant is undertaking the processing of vegetables on behalf of their client. It is settled law that revenue officers cannot argue against the board's circular. In the case in hand, the first appellate authority as well as the authorised representative of the revenue are arguing against the board's clarification as reproduced hereinabove. We do not have any hesitation to hold that such arguments put forth our view the activity of processing the vegetables by the appellant will be in relation to agriculture hence not liable to service tax under business auxiliary services. - impugned order is unsustainable and liable to be set aside - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. ST/48/12 - Final Order No. A/3353/2015-WZB/STB - Dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n relation to agriculture. Learned departmental representative would also argue on the same grounds. We find that the said argument does not hold water inasmuch, the board vide circular number 143/12/2011 - ST dated 26/5/2011 has clarified the taxability of an activity of processing on behalf of client in relation to agriculture. The said circular is reproduced. Subject : Processing for or on behalf of client, in relation to agriculture - causing sale or purchase of agricultural produce -- reg . Representations have been received that client processing of tobacco involving threshing and drying of tobacco leaves and client processing of raw cashew involving roasting/drying, shelling and peeling of raw cashew to recover kernel, are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioned under the explanation to the term agricultural produce', in the inclusive portion along with other items like cereals, pulses, etc. 4. Trade Notice/Public Notice may be issued to the field formations accordingly. 5. Please acknowledge the receipt of this circular. 5.1 The above said clarification would squarely apply in the facts of this case as it is undisputed that appellant is undertaking the processing of vegetables on behalf of their client. It is settled law that revenue officers cannot argue against the board's circular. In the case in hand, the first appellate authority as well as the authorised representative of the revenue are arguing against the board's clarification as reproduced hereinabove. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
