Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2016 (7) TMI 1709

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... [2010 (5) TMI 608 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT]. Accordingly, the appellant is the person, liable to pay service tax for the technical know-how, which is received from outside India, as such, he is provider of taxable service under Rule 2(r) and consequently, becomes output service provider under Rule 2(p) of CCR. Further, Rule 5 of Taxation of Service (Provided from Outside India & Received in India), Rules 2006, refers to availing of Cenvat Credit and not to utilization of credit. Accordingly, I hold that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) is in error in not treating the appellant as output service provider. Therefore, the impugned orders are set aside. - Decided in favour of appellant
Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) Shri Prashan .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ice" for manufacturing of excisable goods. In the show cause notice dated 12.10.2012, the ld. Jt. Commissioner had demanded service tax of ₹ 26,61,438/- again, on receiving of know-how by alleging that Cenvat credit had wrongly been utilized for payment of service tax on the service received because service received cannot be construed as "output service" as defined under the Rule 2(p) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. In the adjudication order, he had confirmed the demand by invoking the Rule 5 of Taxation of Services (Provided from outside India and Received in India) Rules, 2006 (in short "Import of Service Rules"), though this rule was not invoked in the show cause notice. The Jt. Commissioner had ignored the binding precedents in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ara Modler Ltd. (Supra.) held as follows:- 6. " If we read Rule 2(q) of Cenvat Credit Rules wit Rule 2(1)(d)(iv), we find that appellant is a person liable to service tax, once appellant is liable to pay service tax he becomes provider of taxable service under Rule 2(r) and consequently becomes output service provider under Rule 2(p) of the Cenvat Credit Rules. Revenue is also relying on Rule 5 of Taxation of Services (Provided from outside India and Received in India) Rules. We find that Rule 5 refers to availing of Cenvat credit and not to utilization of credit. We are therefore of the view that the finding of the Commissioner not treating the appellant as output service provider, is not correct and accordingly we set aside the impugne .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates