Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2014 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (4) TMI 363 - CESTAT MUMBAIWaiver of pre-deposit - online database access or retrieval service - whether the appellant is a mere participant or the appellant access or retrieves data from the computer system maintained by the CRS Companies - Held that:- services received by Jet from CRS companies fall under the category of online database access and/or retrieval service. Since the service provider is situated abroad, in terms of Section 66A the appellant is liable to discharge the service tax liability on reverse charge basis and we hold accordingly - Following decision of Thai Airways International Public Company Ltd. [2013 (8) TMI 48 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] - Decided against assessee. Interpretation of the scope of Section 66A - reverse charge - Whether the service tax has to be demanded for the appellant airline or from a group company of the foreign service provider in India - Held that:- It is the contention of the appellant that the CRS companies have their own group entities in India and therefore, it is those group entities who are liable to pay service tax on the services provided by the foreign entity and not the appellant. The contention of the appellant in this regard is mis-placed. First of all, the service provider and the group companies in India are distinct and different legal entities. The group entities in India are not a branch office or agency of the foreign service provider. Further, they are not involved in any way in providing the service of online data access or retrieval service. Therefore, they clearly fall outside the purview of section 66A read with the Explanation thereto - Prima facie case not in favour of assessee. Extended period of limitation - Held that:- The question of time bar is both a question of fact as well as a question as well as a question of law. Even according to the appellant, out of the total service tax demand of ₹ 187 core, an amount of ₹ 147 crore (approx) is within the normal period of limitation; therefore, the question of time bar can be gone into at the time of final hearing of the appeal. Financial difficulty / hardship - Held that:- appellant has not established any prima facie case at all. - The service tax demand confirmed against the appellant is also substantial to the extent of ₹ 187 core and the demand for the normal period (as per appellant's contention) itself is about ₹ 147 crore. Therefore, the plea of financial hardship at best can be considered only for waiver of interest and penalties imposed and the tax demand beyond the normal period of limitation. - Conditional stay granted.
|