9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 1041X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ware development and enhancement including export of software consultancy services. The Appellant had taken registration in December 2015 and filed their ST-3 returns for the period October 2015 to March 2016. The Appellant is also assessed to income tax. 3. It appeared to Revenue that Appellant have declared income of Rs.1,07,38,534/- in the income tax return for the financial year 2015-16 whereas they have declared gross receipt of Rs.50,27,482/- in their half yearly service tax return. Thus, it appeared that Appellant have not disclosed proper taxable turnover. Accordingly, notice was issued to file various documents like Balance sheet, Profit and Loss account, bills, contract agreements, ledger, bank statement, reconciliation statement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hment of distinct person. After verification of the aforementioned documents and explanations given by the assessee he recorded the finding - the assessee have provided software development/enhancement consultation services for various projects to Mavensoft Technologies LLC, a company incorporated in USA. Further found that both the parties are distinguished persons as per the agreement and situated in non-taxable territory and hence place of provision of service in the facts of the case is that of recipient of service, which is in foreign territory or non-taxable territory. Accordingly, place of provision of service in the instant case is outside India in terms of Rule 3 of POPS Rules 2012. He also recorded the finding that the total recei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7. The Commissioner (Appeals) was pleased to record the following findings: - 7. As regard to the above, I find that the Adjudicating Authority while dropping the demand has concluded that the income of Rs. 1,07,38,534/- during the financial year 2015-16, pertains to the export of services i.e. software development/enhancement and consultancy services for various projects of M/s Mavensoft Technologies LLC, USA in terms of Rule 6A of the Finance Act 1994. Further, I find from the records that the actual service agreement was not presented before the Adjudicating Authority and the agreement produced and verified by the Adjudicating Authority is only a confidentiality agreement entered by the Respondent and M/s Mavensoft Technologies LLC, U ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Adjudication Order without finding any error or impropriety. The Adjudicating Authority have recorded categorical finding that after examining the relevant documents like financial statements, form 26AS, agreement, FIRC, bank statement etc., that the Appellant has got no domestic turnover and the total turnover is from export of services. Only for the reason that he did not mention the name of the other 3 clients of the Appellant namely - i) Airniugini Company, ii) Catillo Apps project, iii) Groebner GMbH Project, no adverse inference could have been drawn. There is no ground raised by Revenue in their appeal that the Appellant have not exported the service or the recipients of service are not located in non-taxable territory. 11. It is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
