9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 550X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... athews, Adv For the Respondent : Shri Kishore Kunal, Adv ORDER Per: R K Singh: Stay Application along with Appeal has been filed against Order-in-Original dated 17.04.2013 in terms of which the service tax demand of Rs. 1,59,95,229/- was confirmed along with interest and penalties. The demand was confirmed under 'Consulting Engineer' service on the ground that the appellant had receive ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of a person liable to pay service tax, where the transaction of taxable service is with any associate enterprise] [underlined words inserted vide Finance Act 2008, w.e.f. 10th May, 2008]." It stated that prior to 10.05.2008, because they had not 'paid' for the consulting engineer service received from its associate enterprises abroad, no service tax was payable as the aforesaid (underl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amount in respect of service from associate enterprises received before 10.05.2005. It is nowhere brought out in the impugned order or in the Show Cause Notice that the outstanding amount as on 10.05.2008 has ever been paid by the appellant. CESTAT in the case of Gecas Services India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) (in para 8) held as under:- "The department's contention is that in view of the words "for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t be given retrospective effect. The ratio of the above judgment of the Tribunal is squarely applicable to the facts of this case and just on account of use of the words "for the removal of doubts" in the Explanation to Rule 6(1), this explanation cannot be treated as a clarificatory explanation having retrospective effect. The Apex Court in case of Union of India v. Martin Lottery Agencies Limite ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
