9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1689X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a Sisupal, AC (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER [Order per : Mathew John, Member (T)]. - The applicant is a company incorporated on 1-5-2008 under the Companies Act, 1956. This company is a joint venture of M/s. Renold International Holding Ltd. (RIHL) and M/s. LG Balakrishnan & Bros. Ltd. (LGB), holding 75% and 25% of shares respectively. 2. Before acquiring the entire business of the Indus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rvices" and the applicant-company should have paid service tax under reverse charge mechanism as provided in Section 66A of the Finance Act, 1994. Based on such reasoning a show cause notice was issued and on adjudication, service tax demand of ₹ 30,96,588/- along with interest and penalties is confirmed against the applicant. Aggrieved by the adjudication order of the Commissioner, applican ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... did not receive any service from the three consulting companies because when the service was rendered the applicant-company was not in existence at all and transfer of money from the applicant-company to RIHL by itself cannot imply that RIHL was providing the service to the applicant. Thus the ld. Advocate submits that services received prior to the incorporation of the company cannot be taxed in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant-company was not in existence and this was an activity for decision making of RIHL which service was provided and got consumed before formation of the applicant-company and the applicant-company cannot be considered as a recipient of service and therefore prima facie the demand on the applicant under Section 66A is not maintainable. Therefore, we grant waiver of pre-deposit of dues arising from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
