TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 774X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . S.T. -Surat-II [ 2023 (2) TMI 781 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD ], on the identical issue this Tribunal has decided that the under the same set of arrangement between the appellant and M/s. Gharda Chemicals Ltd. the demand under management, maintenance or repair service shall not be sustainable. The issue is squarely covered by the above two orders of this Tribunal, whereby, it was held that under the arrangement between the appellant and M/s. Gharda Chemicals Ltd. there is no provision of service of management, maintenance or repair service, whereas, the activity of the appellant is of production of excisable goods. Therefore, following the above decisions of this Tribunal in the present matters also the demand shall not sustain. The impugn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... findings of the impugned order. 4. On careful consideration of the submission made by both the sides and perusal of record, we find that in the appellant s own case for the previous period by two above cited orders, on the identical issue this Tribunal has decided that the under the same set of arrangement between the appellant and M/s. Gharda Chemicals Ltd. the demand under management, maintenance or repair service shall not be sustainable. The relevant order dated 24.03.2023 of this Tribunal is reproduced below: 4. On careful consideration of the submissions made by both the sides and perusal of the record, we find that there is only difference of period in the present case and the case which was decided by this Tribunal vide ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ould belong to the service recipient and not to the service provider. In the present case the order impugned has held the appellant as service provider and Gharda Chemicals Ltd as service recipient. It is also not disputed that it is the service recipient M/s GCL is paying for the use of manufacturing facilities of the appellant for manufacture of the excisable goods of M/s Gharda chemicals. In this fact the appellant using their own plant machinery equipment that too for production of excisable goods on behalf of M/s Gharda chemical Ltd. In this undisputed fact by any stretch the activities of the appellant cannot be classified under Management, Maintenance Repair Service. Moreover, the activity per se cannot be treated as service itself ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e plant was used exclusively for production of goods of GCL. Therefore, the service is classified under Management, Maintenance Repair Service. As we already observed above that since the plant machinery equipment used for the purpose of production belongs to the appellant, the service is not classified under Management, Maintenance Repair Service. Further, the activities carried out by the appellant are undoubtedly production of goods on job work basis on behalf of GCL. This position will not alter irrespective of fact that whether the plant, machinery equipment are used exclusively for GCL or partly for GCL or partly for others, therefore, on this basis the activity cannot be classified as Management, Maintenance Repair Service. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
