2018 (4) TMI 727 - AT - Service Tax

Liability of service tax - Intellectual Property Service - trade secrets - Held that - an identical issue in the assessee-Appellants own case came up before the Tribunal in M/s Dharampal Satyapal Sons Pvt. Ltd. Versus CST Delhi 2017 (5) TMI 467 - CESTAT NEW DELHI and Tribunal has held that no Service Tax liability will arise in respect of such trade secrets regarding nature process of products etc. - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant-assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Service Tax liability under 'Intellectual Property Service' category.

Analysis:
The dispute in the present appeal revolves around the Service Tax liability of the assessee under the category of 'Intellectual Property Service' as per Section 65(55b) of the Finance Act, 1994. Both parties acknowledged a previous Tribunal decision in the assessee's own case, where it was held that no Service Tax liability would arise concerning trade secrets related to the nature, process, or products. The Tribunal analyzed a technical assistance agreement between the appellant and another party, highlighting the transfer of technical information, formulae, and trade secrets for the manufacture of perfumes and spices. The agreement emphasized the confidentiality of the information and the consideration as royalty to be paid by the other party.

The Original Authority had previously determined that the registration of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) under the Patent Act, 1970, was solely for protection against infringement and not a prerequisite for service tax liability. However, the Tribunal clarified that the levy of service tax on IPR is based on the intangible property rights recognized by law, such as trademarks, designs, and patents. Any right not acknowledged by the law in force in India cannot be subjected to tax liability under the category of Intellectual Property Rights. The Tribunal emphasized the statutory scope of tax entry under Section 65(55a) of the Finance Act, 1994, stating that taxable IPR must be a right to intangible property recognized by current laws.

Based on the established legal position in favor of the assessee in their previous case, where it was held that no Service Tax liability arises for certain trade secrets, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal filed by the assessee. Consequently, the appeal by the assessee was allowed, following the precedent set in their own case, resulting in a favorable outcome for the appellants.