Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-07-2025
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please
let us know via our feedback form
so we can address them promptly.
Home
2017 (8) TMI 1050 - AT - Service TaxExport of services - promotion and marketing of spares and accessories of Yamazaki Mazak Trading Corporation Japan(YMTCJ) and they have received commissioner from YMTCJ - appellants are involved in various activities in India on behalf of the foreign principals for a consideration - extended period of limitation - Held that - it is apparent in terms of circular dated 24-2-2009 the Indian agent who undertake marketing in India of goods of foreign seller and received the commission for the service in convertible foreign exchange would qualify for the benefit of export of service. The period covered in the instant case is 1-1-2009 to 26-2-2010 - It is seen that the impugned order relies on the circular dated 13-5-2011 to interpret phrase use outside India to ascertain if the said services qualifies as export service. The circular dated 24-2-2009 simply prescribed that the said service qualifies as exports if recipient is located outside India. In this circumstances appellant s claimed that they had bonafide belief on the strength of these circular dated 24-2-2009 cannot be dislodged. Circular date 24-2-2009 clearly held that in the case of Business auxiliary services provided by Indian Agent who undertakes marketing in India of goods of foreign seller and received the commission for service in convertible foreign exchange and where recipient is located out side India the same would qualify as export of service. In view of the above extended period of limitation cannot be invoked in the instant case. Reliance placed in the case of Microsoft Corporation (India) Pvt. Ltd 2014 (10) TMI 200 - CESTAT NEW DELHI (LB) where it was held that The service being provided may or may not result in any sales of the product in Indian soil. The transactions and activities between the appellant and Singapore principal company are the disputed activities. As such the services are being provided by the appellant to Singapore Recipient company and to be used by them at Singapore may be for the purpose of the sale of their product in India have to be held as export of services. The services provided by the appellant qualify as export of service - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|