9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2006 (11) TMI 23 - AT - Service TaxConsulting Engineer-Service tax - A foreign based company transferred research, engineer development etc for manufacturing to an Indian company-Foreign company is not liable to pay Service tax
Issues: Whether services provided by the appellants fall under "Consulting Engineer Services" and are leviable to Service Tax.
Analysis: The case involves the appellants based in Switzerland engaged in providing technology for the manufacture and sale of products "Ingranox" to M/s. Ciba India. The revenue seeks to tax the appellants for these services under the category of "Consulting Engineer Services." The appellants argue that providing technology for goods manufacturing is not taxable under this category. They also claim that the demand for service tax is for a period prior to when such services were taxable. However, both the original and appellate authorities did not accept the appellant's arguments. The appellant's representative relies on various Tribunal decisions to support their case, including Pfizer Ltd. v. CCE, Mumbai, Navinon Ltd. v. CCE, Mumbai, Bajaj Auto Ltd. v. CCE, Aurangabad, Transweigh (India) Ltd. v. CCE, Mumbai, and Essel Propack Ltd. v. CCE, Mumbai. They argue that the Tribunal's decision in the case of Transweigh (India) Ltd., relied upon by the Commissioner, has been distinguished in subsequent decisions. They particularly emphasize the latest decision in the case of Essel Propack Ltd., Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai. Upon hearing the arguments, the Tribunal finds that the legal position on the disputed issue has been clarified in the decisions referred to. As a result, the impugned order is set aside, and the matter is remanded to the original adjudicating authority for a fresh decision in line with the judgments cited. The appeal is allowed for remand, based on the legal precedents provided. This judgment highlights the importance of legal precedents in tax matters and the need for aligning decisions with established case law. The case underscores the significance of interpreting tax laws in light of relevant judicial pronouncements to ensure consistency and fairness in tax assessments.
|
