TMI Blog2011 (6) TMI 363X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iability on the recipient of Services - Held that:- As decided in Indian National Shipowners Association vs. Union of India [2008 (12) TMI 41 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY] that "before enactment of Section 66A it is apparent that there was no authority vested by law in the Respondents to levy service tax on a person who is resident in India, but who receives services outside India - As the demand of Ser ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... International 2010 (20) STR 165 (P H HC) 2. Heard the learned DR for a while on the stay petition. Considering the nature of dispute, I deem it appropriate to waive the pre-deposit of dues as per the impugned order and allow the stay petition and take up the appeal for final disposal. 3. The appellant received business auxiliary services from foreign agents who did not have officers in India. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntroduced in the Finance Act enabling fastening of liability on the recipient of Services. 5. Learned DR relies on the decision of Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Hindustan Zinc Ltd. reported in [2008 (11) STR 338 (Tri-LB)] and submits that the appellants are required to pay service tax for the period from 1.1.2005. He reiterated the other findings and reasoning of the Commissioner ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was no authority vested by law in the Respondents to levy service tax on a person who is resident in India, but who receives services outside India." 7. In view of the above, the demand of Service Tax relating to period 16.6.2005 to 31.12.2005 on the recipients is clearly not sustainable. In view of the above, the impugned order is set aside and appeal is allowed with consequent relief, as per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
