Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
C.C.E. & S.T., Meerut-I vs M/S. Sh Om Singh Contractor on 19 March, 2013
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI PRINCIPAL BENCH, COURT NO. III Service Tax Appeal No. 3595 of 2012 [Arising out of Order-In-Appeal No.69-ST/MRT-I/12 dated 27.07.2012 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Meerut-I] For approval and signature: Honble Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) Honble Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Member (Technical) 1 Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? 2 Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? 3 Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order? 4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities? C.C.E. & S.T., Meerut-I Appellants Vs. M/s. Sh Om Singh Contractor Respondent
Appearance:
Shri V.P. Batra for the Appellants Shri S.C. Kamra, Advocate for the Respondent CORAM:
Hon'ble Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) Hon'ble Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Member (Technical) Date of Hearing/decision : 19.03.2013 ORDER NO .FO/ 55912 /2013-Cus(Br) Per Archana Wadhwa (for the Bench):
Being aggrieved with the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals), Revenue has filed the present appeal.
2. After hearing both sides, we find that the issue required to be decided in the present appeal is as to whether the activity of bottling of liquor amounts to manufacture on whether the same is not covered by the definition of manufacture so as to treat the same as packaging activity leviable to service tax.
3. We find that Commissioner (Appeals) has granted the relief to the respondents by relying upon the Larger Bench decision of the Honble MP High Court in the case of Som Distilleries Pvt. Ltd. and other vs. Union of India [2009 (92) RLT 413 (MP-LB)]. It stands held in the said case that the activity of bottling of liquor amounts to manufacture. By following the said decision, Tribunal has granted relief in subsequent number of decisions. Reference can be made to Tribunals decision in the case of Kedia Castle Delleon Industries Ltd. vs. CCE, Raipur [2011 (22) STR 15 (Tri-Del)] as also to a subsequent decision in the case of Daurala Sugar Works vs. CCE, Meerut [2011-TIOL-567 -CESTAT-Del]
4. Inasmuch as the issue stands decided, we find no reason to interfere in the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals). Revenues appeal is accordingly rejected.
(Pronounced in the open court)
( Archana Wadhwa ) Member(Judicial)
( Rakesh Kumar ) Member(Technical)
ss
??
??
??
??
2