2014 (2) TMI 1126

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tivity appears to be marketing and promotion of services of M/s. Amedus and M/s. Galileo. It is seen that on an identical issue the Tribunal allowed the stay petition partly. The learned counsel for the applicant pleads that the demand is barred by limitation, which would be looked into at the time of final hearing of the appeal. As such, the appellant is directed to pre-deposit 25% of the tax - C .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... icant for such usage of software. Adjudicating authority held that tax is leviable on such incentives under the category of Business Auxiliary Service and confirmed the demand of tax for the period from 2003-04 to 2006-07 and imposed penalty and interest, upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). 3. The learned counsel on behalf of the applicants submits that on the same issue in the applicants own .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed in 2011 (22) S.T.R.530 (Tri.-Chennai), the Tribunal directed the appellant to deposit 25% of the service tax demanded. 5. After hearing both sides, prima facie, we find force in the submissions of the learned authorised representative. Prime facie, the applicant activity appears to be marketing and promotion of services of M/s. Amedus and M/s. Galileo. It is seen that on an identical issue th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X