Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2021 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (9) TMI 1271 - AT - Service TaxLevy of service tax - Intellectual Property Service - amount collected towards license fee for using the software provided, would fall under IPR services or not - management consultancy services - extended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- The agreement is for right to use software and the activity will not fall under the definition of Intellectual Property Right Services - the software fees have to be treated as an IPR as registered outside India. Only intangible property which is registered within India would fall under IPR service during the relevant period. The software admittedly is registered outside India - the demand under Intellectual Property Right Service cannot sustain and requires to be set aside. Management Consultancy Service - HELD THAT:- Admittedly, there is no agreement furnished by the department to establish that the appellant has received management consultancy service from M/s. Fox Conn, China. On perusal of the invoices, it is seen that the amounts are in the nature of vehicle hire charges, cost of fuel charges, hostel charges, selling expenses, meal expenses, salary to staff attending the foreign personnel etc. There is no evidence for payment of remuneration to the foreign personnel in foreign currency by the appellant. Even though the appellant might have expended huge amounts for the said foreign personnel, unless there is evidence that these amounts are paid to foreign personnel for providing management consultancy service, the demand is incorrect - There is also no evidence to prove that they have received management consultancy service or paid fees for such services so as to be liable to pay service tax under reverse charge mechanism. On this ground, the demand under Management Consultancy Service cannot sustain. Extended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- On perusal of the letter issued by department, it is seen that after verification of accounts certain objections have been raised inter alia demanding service tax under the above categories. There is no positive act of suppression of facts or willful mis-statement brought out by the department so as to invoke the extended period. Further, the appellant is called upon to pay the service tax under reverse charge mechanism for the services. The appellant would be able to avail credit of the same and the situation is entirely revenue neutral. For these reasons, we hold that the demand is time-barred. The appellant succeeds on limitation also. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|