2007 (11) TMI 29 - AT - Service Tax

Consulting Engineers Service Transfer of technical know how Royalty paid to service provider in abroad As per Not. 36/04, service recipient is liable to pay duty Disputed period is prior to this notification so demand is unsustainable Technical know-how cannot be classified as Consultancy

Summary

Issues:
1. Liability of service tax on royalties paid under collaboration agreement for technical know-how transfer.
2. Interpretation of Notification No. 36/2004-ST dated 31-12-2004 regarding liability for Consulting Engineers' Service.
3. Classification of transfer of technical know-how as Consulting Engineers' Service.

Analysis:
1. The case involved a dispute regarding the liability of service tax on royalties paid by an appellant-company under a collaboration agreement for technical know-how transfer. The department demanded service tax on the royalties, considering it as Consulting Engineers' Service. The original authority dropped the proceedings, but the Commissioner revised the order, imposing service tax, interest, and penalties on the appellant.

2. The main contention of the appellant was that the proposal for the levy lacked legal sanction. The appellant argued that the liability to pay service tax is on the service provider unless specified otherwise by the Central Government through a Notification. The appellant relied on Notification No. 36/2004-ST, stating that recipients of Consulting Engineers' Service became liable to pay service tax only after 31-12-2004. The appellant cited relevant case laws to support their argument.

3. After considering the submissions, the judge allowed the appeal. It was noted that Consulting Engineers' Service was specified under Notification No. 36/2004-ST only from 31-12-2004, making recipients liable to pay service tax on such services from that date. The transfer of technical know-how was not classified as Consulting Engineers' Service, as established by legal precedents cited by the appellant. The impugned order demanding service tax was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.