9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2728X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of demand of Service Tax liability on the ground that during the period from April, 2005 to Dec., 2009, the appellant had availed the services of the Consultant, who are situated abroad and that they have not discharged the Service Tax liability on the amounts remitted to the foreign based Consultant despite the facts that they are required to do so under the reverse charge mechanism. The investigating authority after concluding the investigation, issued show cause notice for demand of Service Tax with interest and also for imposition of penalties under various categories like, Business Auxiliary Services, Management or Business Consultancy Services, Business Support Services, Consulting Engineers Service, Intellectual Property Services, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , tax liability arises. It is his submission that penalties be set aside even if amounts are confirmed as tax liability within the limitation period. 4. Learned AR submits that the provisions of Rule 2(1)(d)(iv) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 were in effect from 1-1-2005, demand of the Service Tax from that date under the reverse charge mechanism is sustainable. He would rely upon the judgment of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Hindustan Zinc Ltd. which was upheld by the Apex Court as reported in 2009 (14) S.T.R. J125 (S.C.). He would also submit that the demand within the limitation period as argued by the appellant should be upheld as also for the extended period, as appellant herein is in an organized sector and was awar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 66A of the Finance Act, 1994 will be applicable from 18-4-2006 and will not apply to any case prior to that date. This judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court was upheld by the Apex Court as also subsequently the Apex Court has dismissed the Review Petitions in 2011. On the face of such a clear law as settled by the Apex Court, the Service Tax demand for the period April, 2005 to 17-4-2005 does not arise and such demand is set aside, as also interest liability and penalties. (b) Secondly, as regards the Service Tax demand during period 18-4-2005 to Dec, 2009, the main argument of the appellant is that the issue was being agitated at various forums, hence the extended period cannot be invoked. We agree with the contentions raised ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
