9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (1) TMI 191X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant filed refund claim. The adjudicating authority rejected the refund claim which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). In view of the Larger Bench decision of the appellants own case, we hold that the appellant is not liable to pay service tax. On perusal of the aforesaid decision, we find that in the said cases, it has been held that the appellant deposited tax to the Government without r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssion under the category of "Consulting Engineering". The appellant filed refund claim. The adjudicating authority rejected the refund claim which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). 3. On perusal of the records, we find that the issue as to whether recipient was liable to pay service tax on the services received from abroad prior to 1-1-2005, was referred to the Larger Bench. The Larger ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 'consulting engineer' service from outside India, the appellant was not liable to pay service tax prior to 1-1-2005. 19. The reference having been answered, the appeal may be listed before the Division Bench for final disposal according to law." 4. Thus it is settled by the Larger Bench in the appellants own case that the appellant is not liable to pay the tax. The learned DR raised an obje ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he aforesaid decision, we find that in the said cases, it has been held that the appellant deposited tax to the Government without remitting to the foreign company not to be refunded. The issue was decided after examining the agreement. In view of that, we set aside the impugned order and matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority to decide the refund claim in the light of the above case law ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
