Case Law Details
Universal Medicap Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & ST (CESTAT Ahmedabad)
CESTAT held that the packed goods, delivered for sterilization, were indeed semi-finished goods. As such, the company was within its right to avail the exemption under Notification No. 8/2005-S.T., dated 1-3-2005
There is no dispute that appellant have carried out the activity of processing of goods on behalf of the clients which is covered under taxable entry of Business Auxiliary Service. For the processing activity there is an exemption Notification No. 8/2005-S.T., dated 1-3-2005 Both the lower authorities have denied exemption on the ground that firstly, the appellant have not received raw material for processing and secondly, after processing the goods were not used in the manufacture by the client.
From the plain reading of Notification No. 8/2005-S.T., dated 1-3-2005 it is clear that not only the raw material should be processed by the job-worker but even some finished goods are also to be processed for the eligibility of exemption notification. In the present case, the packed goods were supplied to the appellant for carrying out process of sterilization therefore the packed goods before sterilization are semi-finished goods. Therefore the contention of the Revenue that only raw material should be processed to be eligible for exemption is incorrect as semi-finished goods are also allowed to be processed for making eligible for the above notification.
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT AHMEDABAD ORDER
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
