2008 (7) TMI 84 - AT - Service Tax

Appellants received technical know-how for manufacture of automobile components demand and interest - Transfer of technical know-how for manufacture of any product in exchange for a lump sum payment or payment of royalty does not constitute rendering of Consulting Engineer Service impugned order is vacated and appeal of assessee is allowed

Summary

Issues:
- Demand of service tax under the category of Consulting Engineer
- Whether transfer of technical know-how for a lump sum payment amounts to rendering of Consulting Engineer Service
- Tax liability on services received from abroad by an Indian recipient before 16.08.2002

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed against an order sustaining the demand of service tax under the category of Consulting Engineer. The original authority demanded service tax, interest, and penalties, which were partially vacated by the Commissioner in the impugned order. The appellants had received technical know-how for manufacturing automobile components against a lump sum payment under an agreement with a provision for royalty payment. The demand of service tax was on the lump sum payment made to the foreign entity.

2. The consultant for the appellants argued that transfer of technical know-how does not amount to rendering of Consulting Engineer Service based on judicial authorities. It was highlighted that the appellants were not authorized to discharge service tax on behalf of the foreign entity providing the technical know-how, as they did not operate an office in India. The consultant presented a decision of the Tribunal supporting this argument. The JCDR for the respondent did not contest the submission.

3. Upon reviewing the case records and submissions, the Tribunal agreed with the consultant's argument. It was established that transfer of technical know-how for a lump sum payment or royalty does not constitute Consulting Engineer Service. Additionally, it was noted that before a specific date, Indian recipients were not liable to discharge tax on services received from abroad. Referring to a previous Tribunal decision, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, vacating the impugned order and allowing the appeal.

This judgment clarifies the distinction between transfer of technical know-how and Consulting Engineer Service for the purpose of service tax liability. It also addresses the tax liability of Indian recipients for services received from abroad before a specified date, providing a clear legal interpretation in line with previous judicial decisions.