9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 741X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... atio of judgement. As regards the contention of the appellants that they Were receiving "Technical Testing and Analysis" service, it is seen that the said service is defined under Section 65 (105) (zzh) as "to any person by a technical testing and analysis agency, in relation to technical testing and analysis". It can be hardly anybody's case that the appellants were receiving services from CAI in relation to "Technical Testing and Analysis" because nothing belonging to appellants was subjected to technical testing and analysis. - unable to locate any statutory or constitutional provisions which support the notion that in case of revenue neutrality the liability to tax abates. Further whether there has been wilful mis-statement or suppressi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and other related services in the United States of America (USA). (iii) Appellants have appointed CAI as its marketing service provider and billing/collection service provider and for rendering Services for development of software on a non-exclusive basis in USA and which appointment CAI has accepted. (iv) Appellants will be entering into contracts with the customers based in USA for development/modification of software and other related services to the customers based in USA. (v) CAI in certain cases may enter into contracts in its own name with the customers based in USA while rendering the agreed services to the appellants. (vi) At all times, CAI will be the service provider to the appellants as agreed between the two partie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arly covered under the definition of Business Auxiliary Service. 3. We have considered the contentions of the appellants. In the present case, it is seen that CAI were providing the services to the customers of the appellants as per the agreement between CAI and the appellants and the payment for the same was made by the appellants to CAI. Thus, CAI was engaged in providing services in relation to provision of service on behalf of client which in this case is the appellants. Thus, prima facie the services received by the appellants are classifiable under BAS. As regards judgement of CESTAT in the case of NBCC (supra), in para 8.2 ., CESTAT has noted as under:- 8.2 Relying on the above definition issued on behalf of the Department tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case that the appellants were receiving services from CAI in relation to Technical Testing and Analysis because nothing belonging to appellants was subjected to technical testing and analysis. 4. As regards Revenue neutrality argument advanced by the appellants, we are unable to locate any statutory or constitutional provisions which support the notion that in case of revenue neutrality the liability to tax abates. Further whether there has been wilful mis-statement or suppression of facts on the part of appellants is to be determined with reference to the facts and circumstances of the case which requires detailed analysis which can be taken up only at the time of final hearing. 5. In the light of foregoing, we are of the view tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
