2014 (2) TMI 439 - AT - Service Tax

Export of services - marketing of foreign Principal s products in India - Rule 3(1)(iii) of the Export of Service Rules, 2005 - Held that - Since in this case, the respondent s clients to whom the service has been provided are located outside India and the same has been used by them for their business, the first two conditions of Rule 3(1) read with Rule 3(2) are satisfied. The other condition regarding export of service prescribed in Rule 3(2) is also satisfied inasmuch as payment of this service has been received in convertible foreign exchange - Decided in favor of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether the service provided by the respondent can be considered as export of service.
2. Whether the conditions of service being delivered outside India, used outside India, and payment received in convertible foreign exchange are satisfied.
3. Whether the appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is justified.

Analysis:
1. The respondent provided marketing services to foreign principals based in the UK, Italy, and Australia, involving marketing their products in India and receiving commission. Initially, service tax was paid on the commission. Subsequently, realizing the services amounted to export of services, a refund was sought. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal, considering the service as export of service under Rule 3(1)(iii) of the Export of Service Rules, 2005, due to the services being used by persons abroad for business and payment received in foreign exchange.

2. The Revenue challenged the Commissioner (Appeals) order, arguing that the service did not meet the conditions of being delivered and used outside India, and payment received in convertible foreign exchange. The Departmental Representative emphasized that agreements indicated services were meant for use in India. However, the Advocate for the respondent defended the order, highlighting that the services were used by foreign principals abroad for their business, supported by Foreign Exchange Remittance Certificates.

3. The Tribunal observed that the service provided by the respondent to overseas Principals, involving marketing in India, fell under taxable business auxiliary service. The service qualified as export under Rule 3(1) of the Export of Services Rules, 2005, as the recipients were located outside India, the service was used for their business abroad, and payment was received in convertible foreign exchange. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) findings, dismissing the Revenue's appeal, as the conditions for export of service were satisfied, as evidenced by the foreign exchange remittance certificates.

This detailed analysis of the judgment addresses the issues raised, the arguments presented by both sides, and the Tribunal's reasoning in arriving at the decision to dismiss the Revenue's appeal.