2012 (8) TMI 606

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... espondent. [Judgment per : N. Kumar, J.]. -  The revenue has preferred this appeal challenging the order passed by the Tribunal [2007 (8) S.T.R. 33 (Tribunal)] which has held that the assessee is not liable to pay Service tax. 2. The assessee M/s. Siemens Vdo Automotive Limited entered into an agreement with M/s. Mannesmann VDO AG, and paid a sum of Rs. 3,56,35,156/- (from 16-8-2002 t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e patented goods, (ii) the grant of rights for use of intellectual property or patent for the manufacture of the patented goods in accordance with the patented technology, (iii) the Company is not engaged in the profession of a Consulting Engineer providing advise, consultancy or technical assistance in one or more disciplines of engineering. The transaction between the two companies is a transact .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... assessee preferred an appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal following its earlier judgments held that no service tax is leviable in the facts of the case and therefore, he set aside the order of the Commissioner and restored the order of the Assistant Commissioner. Aggrieved by the same, the revenue is in appeal. 3. Therefore, the question that arises for our consideration in the appeal is wh .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X