9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1034X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ause notice does not clearly state the nature of know-how which the appellant has availed from his foreign company. Demand not sustainable and is set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - ST/142/2007-DB - 23145/2017 - Dated:- 13-12-2017 - Shri Kurian Thomas, Advocate, For the Appellant Shri Madhupsharan, Asst. Commissioner (AR), For the Respondent SHRI S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI V. PADMANABHAN, TECHNICAL MEMBER Per : S.S GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dt. 31/01/2007 passed by the Commissioner(Appeals) whereby the Commissioner(Appeals) has upheld the Order-in-Original but ordered requantification of demand and reduced the penalty. 2. Briefly the facts of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the correct position of law. He further submitted that the impugned order is contrary to the binding judicial precedent. He further submitted that the show-cause notice is ambiguous as it did not impute the know-how in question received by the appellant to any particular intellectual property to establish the provisions of intellectual property services. He also submitted that both the authorities have not given any finding that M/s. Mc Cormick Co. Inc, USA is a holder of any form of intellectual copyright and further no transfer of any intellectual property has been established. The learned counsel also referred to the definition of intellectual property contained in clause 55(a) of Section 65 which is reproduced herein below:- Any ri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... international agreement or treaties. Further we also find that the show-cause notice does not clearly state the nature of know-how which the appellant has availed from his foreign company. Further we find that in the case of Navinon Ltd. cited supra, it has been held by the Tribunal that receiving technical know-how from foreign company against payment of royalty not being an authorised representative of foreign company cannot be fastened with service tax liability. We also find that this decision of the Tribunal has been subsequently followed in subsequent decisions cited supra. Therefore by following the ratios of the above said decisions, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned order is not sustainable in law and therefore we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
