TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 503X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ney they have paid insurance guarantee to COFACE France. When these facts are clear in this case, therefore, the service receiver is BNP Paribas and the service provider is COFACE, France. The appellant is only the beneficiary of the transaction held between BNP Paribas and COFACE, France. As the appellant is neither service provider nor service recipient, the appellant is not liable to pay servic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y to appellant and pay insurance guarantee. Revenue is of the view that the service given to BNP Paribas is a service received by the appellant, therefore, same is covered under Banking and Finance Institution service. Accordingly, appellant is liable to pay service tax under Reverse charge mechanism. Proceedings were initiated against the appellant and demand along with interest has been confirme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n. In these circumstances, appellant is not liable to pay service tax under the category of Banking and Finance Institution service under Reverse charge mechanism. He further submits that the service tax demand has been confirmed by invoking the extended period of limitation, whereas the Commissioner has dropped the penalty by giving benefit of section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994 holding that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and who is the service receiver. The facts of the case are clear and show that the money lender BNP Paribas has secured the loan amount lended (sic) to appellant from COFACE France and have secured their money they have paid insurance guarantee to COFACE France. When these facts are clear in this case, therefore, the service receiver is BNP Paribas and the service provider is COFACE, France. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
