9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (8) TMI 53X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8.2008 certified on 12.8.2008 in Appeal No. ST/85/2008) Shri P.K. Sahu, Adv. for the Appellant. Ms. Sudha Koka, SDR for the Respondent. [Order per T. K. Jayaraman Member (Technical)] - This appeal has been filed against Order-in-Appeal No. 68/2007-ST dated 30.09.2007 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals-II), Bangalore. 2. The learned Advocate Shri P.K. Sahu appeared for the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndia and it is also used in India. The learned Advocate strongly argued that the understanding of the lower authority is not correct, the services have rightly been delivered abroad and they have been used by the Singapore Company. They relied on several case laws. They also stated that it should not be considered that the appellant and the company in Singapore are related, even though one is a su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y to the Singapore Company. The recipient of the service is a Singapore Company. When the recipient of the service is Singapore Company, it cannot be said that service is delivered in India and the benefit of the service is derived only by the recipient company. Because of the booking of the orders, the Singapore Company gets business. Therefore, the service is also utilized abroad. In terms of Ru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
