Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2009 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2009 (8) TMI 393 - CESTAT, BANGALOREServices received from abroad during August 2002 to 18-4-2006 - We find that the demand is confirmed against ABB, as recipient of the impugned services, as per rule 2(1)(d)(iv) of the Rules. Rule 2(1)(d)(iv) authorizes the authorities to recover service tax leviable on services provided by a person who is non-resident or is from outside India and does not have any office in India, from the person receiving such service in India. In Indian National Shipowners Association’s case (supra) the Hon’ble High Court had held that demand of service tax for the period prior to 18-4-2006 invoking rule 2(1)(d)(iv) of the Rules was not sustainable.- in view of above decision, demand is not sustainable for period prior to 18-4-06 – further it could not be held that liability to tax on services received from foreign companies was not known to assessee, plea of limitation on ground of revenue neutrality could not be advanced - However, since the department was aware of the nature of the impugned transactions as early as in July 2005 from the agreements furnished and tax paid from the ST 3 returns periodically filed by ABB as an assessee providing taxable services, we find the claim that show-cause notice dated 5-12-2007, was barred by limitation
|