9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2008 (12) TMI 63 - AT - Service TaxRejection of refund claim - dispute is for the period January 2004 to December 2004 in respect of service received by them from Non-resident Engineering Consultant - issue is answered in favour of the assessee and it is held that as a recipient of the consulting engineer service from outside India the appellant was not liable to pay service tax prior to 1-1-2005 - appeal is allowed on merit - refund may be granted after considering the question of principle of unjust enrichment
Issues:
Appeal against rejection of refund claim of Rs. 13,97,010 for services received from a Non-resident Engineering Consultant during January to December 2004. Analysis: The appeal was filed against the rejection of a refund claim for services received from a Non-resident Engineering Consultant. The appellants contended that the issue had already been decided in favor of the assessee by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in a previous case. The Tribunal referred to the case of Hindustan Zinc Ltd. vs. CCE, Jaipur, where it was held that the recipient of taxable services from a non-resident entity without an office in India was not liable to pay service tax prior to 1-1-2005. The Tribunal concurred with this view and allowed the appeal on merit based on the decision of the Larger Bench. The Tribunal emphasized that the recipient of 'consulting engineer' services from outside India was not liable to pay service tax before 1-1-2005. The decision was made in line with previous cases such as Aditya Cement and Ispat Industries. As a result, the appeal was allowed on merit, following the precedent set by the Larger Bench's decision in the Hindustan Zinc Ltd. case. The Tribunal directed that the refund should be granted after considering the principle of unjust enrichment in accordance with the law. The decision was made based on the Larger Bench's ruling and the legal principles surrounding the liability to pay service tax for services received from non-resident entities without an office in India. The appeal was allowed, and the matter was to be listed before the Division Bench for final disposal according to the law.
|
