9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 39X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ide India, the service recipient would be liable for payment of tax and would be treated as a service provider. Prior to that, there was no provision for taxing the service provider situated outside India. The matter in hand relates to a period prior to such amendment, It is not disputed that the provision for payment of service tax extends to the whole of India (except the State of Jammu & Kashmi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt, but no one has appeared on behalf of the respondent. The brief facts of the case are: The respondent company is a company situated in the United Kingdom and has no office or branch in India. The respondent company had provided consultancy services to one M/s Mangalore Chemicals Fertilizers Limited during the period March 1998 to April 2001. The Assessing Authority assessed the responde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecipient would be liable for payment of tax and would be treated as a service provider. Prior to that, there was no provision for taxing the service provider situated outside India. The matter in hand relates to a period prior to such amendment, It is not disputed that the provision for payment of service tax extends to the whole of India (except the State of Jammu Kashmir). The same would mean ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of acceptance in view of the fact that admittedly the respondent company has no branch or office within the territory of India. We find no reason to differ with the order passed by the Tribunal in the present case as the service provider i.e., the respondent company was located outside India and did not have any business operations or office within the territory of India. The appeal is accordin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
