9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 589X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... though subsequent were pursuant to an agreement which was earlier to introduction of the taxable service. The assessee shall file a Memorandum of Written Submissions within 3 weeks from today before the adjudicating authority on this aspect but shall not however be entitled to personal hearing again. Any case supporting the assesse’s contentions may also be appended to the Memorandum of Written Submissions, within the time stipulated herein. - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of assessee. - APPEAL No.ST/57083/2013 - Final Order No.57226 - Dated:- 30-7-2013 - Mr. G. Raghuram, and Mr. Sahab Singh, JJ For the Appellant:- Shri B. L. Narasimhan, Advocate For the Respondent:- Shri Govind Dixit, DR JUDGEMENT Per Jus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e intangible property under any law for the time being in force in India within the meaning of the taxable service as defined in Section 65 (55a) and (55b) of the Act. The adjudicating authority in para-17 of the impugned order considered this contention of the assessee. To the extent relevant for the purposes of this appeal suffice it to notice that the adjudicating authority concluded that the holding company of the assessee had not transferred or delivered any goods but had supplied specifications of tools, its designs, its process and its manner manufacture, etc., which constitute intangible goods. With regard to the issue whether these comprise a right to untenable property under any law for the time being in force, the definitional re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ferred as an one time event and prior to introduction of the taxable service under Section 65 (105) (zzr) of the Act with effect from 10-09-2004; the subsequent royalty payments in instalments/periodically, even when paid after introduction of the taxable service, would not create a taxable liability, since the provision of the service occurred on the entering into the agreement. In support of this contention reliance is placed on the judgement of the Tribunal reported in 2009 (15)S.T.R. 713 (Tri. Del.), in Modi-Mundipharma Pvt. Ltd. Vs. C.C.E., Meerut and an interim order reported in 2012-TIOL-931-CESTAT-DEL in Denso Haryana Pvt. Ltd. Vs. C.C.E., Delhi III. Ld. Counsel for the appellant also contended that the Supreme Court at paragraphs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
