Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2019 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 572 - AT - Service TaxExport of Services or not - Place of Provision of Services - Scientific or Technical Consultancy Services - demand of interest and penalties - HELD THAT:- For the services to be treated as export of service post 2012, the service provided needs to be tested in terms of rule 6A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 read with POPS Rules. As per (d) of Rule 6A(1), for service to be export of service, the place of provision of service should be outside India. Appellants have argued relying on the provisions of the POPS Rules and para 5.4.1 of the Education Guide that place of provision of the service in their case is outside India. We are not in agreement with the submissions made by the appellant that in case of DMPK Standalone Studies, where NCE has been made available to them by the overseas client for undertaking the said studies, the services will be covered by Rule 3 of POPS and hence Export of Services under Rule 6A of Service Tax Rules, 1994. Appellants have relied upon the decisions in their own case to argue that the services provided by them should be considered as export of services. From the facts of the present case we find that appellant have conducted DMPK Studies in respect of the NCE’s provided to them by the overseas client. Rule 4 do not put any conditions in respect of alteration or alternation of the goods provided by the service recipient. Reading anything beyond what has been provided in the rules/ statue cannot be proper interpretation put to rules - In the present case we find that the activities under taken by the appellants in terms of DMPK studies squarely fall within the scheme of Rule 4 of POPS Rules, and hence the location of service provider shall be place of provision of service which is in India and hence cannot be treated as export of service in terms of Rule 6A of Service Tax Rules, 1994. Demand of interest and penalties upheld. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
|