9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 240X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oxicillin 875 mg capsules in healthy male and female volunteers/Fasting State. The fees agreed and to be paid for the said service is 95,380 CDN (Canadian) dollars. ii. For this purpose, Amoxicillin manufactured and packaged by the appellants hereinafter also called APL would be supplied to ALOG. Four types of services were rendered by ALOG to APL (i) General services as per the protocol supplied by APL (ii) Clinical services (iii) Bio-analytical services through Pracs Institute (iv) Storage services of the inventory of drug received from APL and other free samples. iii. The appellants where registered under the head Management Consultants with the Hyderabad-II Commissionerate of Central Excise and Customs, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4, Technical Testing & Analysis excluded any testing or analysis service provided in relation to human beings or animals and as the services provided by ALOG to the appellants were in relation to testing on human beings, it should stand excluded from the purview of service tax. viii. Appellants had also received SCN O.R. No.17/2005 ST (Adjn.) dated 19.12.2005 from the Hyderabad-II Commissionerate stating that the services provided by ALOG to the appellants fell under the service category Scientific or Technical Consultancy Services . The appellants replied to this SCN through their reply dated 23.2.2006. Apart from other submissions, the appellant also submitted that two show cause notices cannot be issued in the same matter and in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earned counsel. In this case, the period involved is prior to 18.4.2006 and as per the decision of the Hon ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Indian National Shipowners Association: 2009 (13) S.T.R. 234 (Bom.) service tax cannot be collected from the receipt of service in India in respect of services received from abroad prior to 18.4.2006. In this case, the period involved is September 2003 to March 2005, thus the entire period is prior to the date on which service tax was required to be paid. Moreover, the show-cause notice proposed demand under one service category whereas confirmation was under another category. Therefore, I find that the appellant is eligible for the refund of tax which was paid by them and it was not required to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
