2007 (6) TMI 525

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... -in-Original No. 26/2004 dated 26-7-2004 holding that transfer of technology by foreign company i.e. the Respondent to the Indian Company would come within the ambit of Consulting Engineer . The Respondents have taken several grounds and submit that the type of service rendered by them will not come within the ambit of Consulting Engineer . They also submitted that they were located abroad and the Commissioner has no jurisdiction to proceed against them. However, their pleas were rejected by the Original Authority but the Commissioner (A) upheld their submissions. The finding of the Commissioner (A) recorded in the impugned order is reproduced herein below : I have perused the records of the case and have carefully considered the submi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ce to manufacture their products and also for the technical assistance. In this regard, to the specific question as to whether Royalty would amount to value of services and whether manufacturers can render the service of a Consulting Engineer, I would like to cite para 4 and 5 of the case law cited supra below : Para 4. Since Ciba Geigy Ltd. Switzerland, are also manufacturers of the same goods, the definition of consulting engineer and providing the services as per sub-section of Sections 65 of the Act cannot be upheld. Para 5. The amounts, which the appellants have to remit to M/s. Ciba Geigy Ltd. Switzerland are mentioned in the agreement under the heading Royalty . Payments of royalty in the common parlance are not insisted as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... E v. Rubco Sales International P. Ltd. - 2006 (1) S.T.R. 291 (Tri.-Bang.) (iii) Amco Batteries Ltd. v. CCE - 2006 (2) S.T.R. 346 (T-Bang.) (iv) CCE v. Micro Finish Valves (P) Ltd. - 2006 (1) S.T.R. 283 (T-Bang.) (v) Yamaha Motors (I) P. Ltd. v. CCE - 2006 (3) S.T.R. 665 (Tribunal) = 2005 (186) E.L.T. 161 (T) (vi) Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. v. CCE - 2006 (1) S.T.R. 217 (T). (vii) CCE v. Valeo Friction Material India P. Ltd. - 2006 (3) S.T.R. 588 (Tribunal) = 2005 (185) E.L.T. 78 (T) (viii) Bajaj Auto Limited v. CCE C. - 2006 (3) S.T.R. 411 (Tribunal) = 2005 (179) E.L.T. 481 (T) (ix) Navinon Ltd. v CCE - 2006 (3) S.T.R. 397 (Tribunal) = 2004 (172) E.L.T. 400 (T) (x) Turbo Energy Limited v. CCE - 20 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X