9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 471X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ommissioner (AR) PER : P R Chandrasekharan The appeal and stay application are directed against Order-in-Original No. 6/PKA/COMMR/2012 dated 22.02.2012 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane-II. 2. The appellant M/s Air India Ltd. entered into an Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with its subsidiary M/s Air India Charters Ltd. (AICL) with effect from 1.4.2005 and operational from 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the levy of Service Tax, the demand was confirmed along with interest and by imposing equivalent amount of penalty apart from penalties under Section 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant is before us. 3. The ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that the Board of Directors of Air India as also AICL in the meeting held on 16.03.2008 decided to modify the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emand is not sustainable. However he fairly submits that the resolutions of Board meeting were not produced before the adjudicating authority at the relevant time. 4. The ld. Commissioner (AR) appearing for the Revenue, on the other hand, contends that MOU has been retrospectively amended with a view to escape Service Tax liability by changing the terms and conditions of the agreement and it has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the Service Tax demand has been made on the whole amount of royalty without explaining how foregoing of rights or sharing of domain knowledge would come under the Intellectual Property Right Services. There is not even a whisper about the services rendered in this regard by the appellant to M/s AICL. Therefore, confirmation of demand on the entire amount of royalty received is not sustainable in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eposit. 6. Accordingly, we waive the requirement of any pre-deposit of the dues adjudged and remand the case back to the adjudicating authority for considering the matter afresh in the light of the directions given above. All the issues are kept open. The appellant should be heard before passing de novo order. 7. Thus, the appeal is allowed by way of remand. Stay petition is also disposed of. ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
