9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 103X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e required to be treated as export. This plea has not been accepted by the Commissioner (A) despite the clarification issued by CBEC by F. No.341/43/96-TRU dated 31.10.1996. The Commissioner (A) has held that the assessee has not received payment for such services provided in convertible foreign exchange. This finding is challenged in this appeal. 2. The learned Counsel submits that this very issue was subject matter of judgment rendered by this Bench in the case of TNT India Private Limited Vs. CST, Bangalore - 2007 (7) STR 142(Tri.-Bang.) wherein it has been held that the services has been performed outside India and therefore, in terms of Rule 3 (2) of Export of Service Rules, 2005, Service Tax is not liable to be levied. This is contes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are as performed outside India : Provided that is such a taxable service is partly performed outside India, it shall be considered to have been performed outside India. (3) In relation to taxable services other than, (i) The taxable services specified in sub-clauses (a), (f), (h).... and (ii) The taxable service specified in sub-clause (d) as are provided in relation to an immovable property of clause (105) of Section 65 of the Act,- i. Such taxable services which are provided and used in or in relation to commerce or industry and the recipient of such services are located outside India. ii. Such taxable services which are provided and used other than in or in relation to commerce or industry, if the recipient of the taxable service ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dering whether there is export of service in the light of the deeming provision in Rule 3(2). All the other points, such as contractual relationship between service provider and service recipient, the status of the person receiving the courier, the fact that transportation is merely incidental in providing courier service are not at all relevant in the light of Rule 3(2). In our view, the clarification dated 3-10-2005 issued by the Ministry with regard to international courier agency is contrary to Rule 3(2) of Export Services Rules, 2005. 4.1. We also note that the Adjudicating Authority has imposed a penalty of Rs. 4.5 crores, which is a very savage one, to say the least. The appellant did not discharge the Service Tax liability on a bon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
