2025-VIL-1715-CESTAT-CHD-ST

SERVICE TAX CESTAT Cases

Service Tax – Refund of service tax paid on manufacturing activity, Unjust Enrichment – Appellant is engaged in the activity of charging of storage batteries for manufacturer of storage batteries. The appellant paid service tax on this activity under the impression that it does not amount to manufacture. Later, the appellant opined that the activity amounts to manufacture and hence, no service tax is payable - Appellant filed refund claim for the service tax paid, which was rejected by the original authority and the impugned order upheld such rejection - Whether the processes undertaken by the appellant amount to manufacture, and hence, are not exigible to service tax - HELD - The processes undertaken by the appellant, such as filling the acid in the batteries, charging the batteries, inspection, and other related processes, amount to manufacture. The conversion of incomplete or unfinished batteries into complete or finished batteries amounts to manufacture under Note 6 of Section XVI of the Central Excise Tariff Act. Therefore, the activities undertaken by the appellant fall under the negative list under Section 66D of the Finance Act, 1994, and hence, are not exigible to service tax. The appellants are eligible to avail refund if otherwise admissible – On the issue of refund, the Commissioner (Appeals) had not given any findings on the issue of unjust enrichment - the appeal is partially allowed to the extent of stating that the processes undertaken by the appellants amount to manufacture – The matter is remand back to the Commissioner (Appeals) with a direction to give his independent findings on the admissibility of the refund on other norms including that of unjust enrichment – The appeal is partly allowed by remand

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page