9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2154X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i, Shri N. S Patel, Advocates For The Respondent (s) : Shri J. Nair, Authorised Representative ORDER Per: P.K. Das These appeals are arising out of a common order, and therefore, both are taken up together for disposal. 2. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the records, we find that the assessee was engaged in the manufacture of Cotton Yarn, Cotton Denim Fabrics and Readymade Garm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. We find from the Show Cause Notice that the amount was paid by the assessee as fees for the services rendered by the non-resident service provider. The Honble Bombay High Court in the case of Indian National Ship-owners Association Vs Union of India 2009 (13) S.T.R. 235 (Bom.) held that the services provided to the assessee outside India became taxable service as per Section 66 A of the Finan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment in Laghu Udyog (supra) is squarely applicable to Rule 2(1)(d)(iv), which is relied on in this case. It appears that it is first time when the Act was amended and Section 66A was inserted by Finance Act, 2006 w.e.f. 18-4-2006, the Respondents got legal authority to levy service tax on the recipients of the taxable service. Now, because of the enactment of Section 66A, a person who is resident ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provision in the Act and therefore, the Respondents had no authority to levy service tax on the members of the Petitioners-association. 21.In the result, therefore, the petition succeeds and is allowed. Respondents are restrained from levying service tax from the members of the Petitioners-association for the period from 1-3-2002 till 17-4-2006, in relation to the services received by the vessels ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
