Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2018 (3) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2018 (3) TMI 509 - AT - Service Tax


Issues:
1. Tax liability on services rendered under the Service Agreement.
2. Denial of Cenvat Credit for unregistered premises.
3. Interest liability on delayed Service Tax payment.

Analysis:

1. Tax liability on services rendered under the Service Agreement: The appeal was filed against the Order-in-Original by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-II, regarding the tax liability on services provided by the assessee-Appellants in connection with promoting the business of M/s Research in Motion Singapore Pte. Ltd. The Revenue considered the receipts taxable under 'Business Auxiliary Service'. The Tribunal found that the services were exported to RIM, Singapore, and the consideration received was for services consumed by RIM, Singapore, making them non-taxable. Legal precedents from the Hon'ble Delhi High Court and Tribunal supported this view, and the impugned order was found to have no merit on this issue.

2. Denial of Cenvat Credit for unregistered premises: The dispute arose from the denial of Cenvat Credit on input services due to certain premises being unregistered with the Department. The assessee-Appellants argued that such denial was not legally sustainable, citing decisions from various High Courts. The Tribunal agreed with the assessee-Appellants, following the ratio of the cited decisions, and held that the Cenvat Credit cannot be denied based on the unregistered premises.

3. Interest liability on delayed Service Tax payment: The issue of interest liability on delayed payment of Service Tax due to book adjustments made between the assessee-Appellants and RIM, Singapore, was examined. The Tribunal noted that the provisions regarding interest liability were prospective and could not apply to book adjustments made before the relevant amendment. Citing a ruling from the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, the Tribunal found that no interest liability could accrue on entries made prior to the said amendment. Therefore, the impugned order was deemed unsustainable on this count.

In conclusion, considering the settled legal position, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal filed by the assessee-Appellants. The decision was based on a thorough analysis of each issue involved, legal precedents, and the specific circumstances of the case.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates