Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2017 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 943 - AT - Service TaxImport of services - reverse charge - advisory fee - services received while availing commercial loans and buyer’s credit in the form of external commercial borrowing from foreign banks - reverse charge mechanism - Held that: - It is clear from the agreement that ABN Singapore and ABN India are branches of ABN Amro Bank, NV, a registered company located in Amsterdam in Netherland. As the lender is having a representative office in India by way of another branch entity of the bank, no service tax liability arises on the appellant in terms of Section 66A - reliance was placed in the case of Nagarjuna Oil Corporation Ltd. vs. CCE, Puducherry [2016 (8) TMI 41 - CESTAT CHENNAI], where the Tribunal examined the scope of Explanation 1 under Section 66A and held that if a foreign entity is having a business establishment in India, the service rendered through such establishment cannot be taxed under reverse charge in terms of Section 66A. Tax liability - amount paid as insurance premium by the appellant to TD Bank as part of loan amount - Held that: - It is clear that the insurance premium amount is paid by TD Bank. The appellant is paying the full amount, including the said insurance amount as a term loan to TD Bank. In such arrangement, we find no consideration is paid by the appellant to be considered as taxable value, under reverse charge basis, in terms of Section 66A - reliance was placed in the case of Kingfisher Airlines P. Ltd. vs. CST, Mumbai [2014 (11) TMI 503 - CESTAT MUMBAI], where in similar situation the Tribunal held that borrower of money in India is neither a service provider nor service recipient in connection with insurance taken by the lender. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|