9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 22X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Respondent. [Order per : Rakesh Kumar, Member (T)]. - The appellant, having their premises at Phase-I, Ghatal RIICO Industrial Area, Bhiwadi, have Service Tax registration for payment of service tax on Business Exhibition Service. In course of audit of their records, it was found that during May 2005 to December 2007, they had paid a sum of Rs. 6,32,373/- towards space booking for stalls fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 78 respectively of the Finance Act, 1994. On appeal to Commissioner (Appeals), he, vide order-in-appeal dated 22-10-2010 set aside the demand of Rs. 53,038/- for the period prior to 18-4-2006 and confirmed only the balance demand of Rs. 13,777/- alongwith interest. He, however, upheld the penalty under Section 77, but reduced the penalty under Section 78 to Rs. 13,777/-. Against this order of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in India, but has been performed abroad, and hence, the same cannot be treated as received in India and the same would not be taxable in the hand of the appellant, that the impugned order upholding the service tax demand alongwith interest and imposition of penalty is, therefore, is not sustainable, that the appellant have a strong prima facie case and, hence, the requirement of pre-deposit of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e India and Received in India) Rules, 2006, service classifiable under Section 65(105)(zzo) provided from outside India shall be treated as received in India only if such services have been performed in India. Since, this service has not been performed in India, we are of prima facie view the same cannot be treated as received in India by the appellants and, hence, service tax in respect of the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
