Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (8) TMI 41 - CESTAT CHENNAI

2016 (8) TMI 41 - CESTAT CHENNAI - 2017 (47) S.T.R. 96 (Tri. - Chennai) - Import of services or not - reverse charge - Project Management Services avaled from Netherland Operating Co., BV, Netherlands (NOC BV) through their Indian establishment. - Held that:- The Indian establishment of NOC BV, Netherlands have registered themselves with the service tax department and remitted the full tax liability with reference to the impugned contract. The original authority while taking cognizance of the ex .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

various law. The service is rendered through such establishment in India. - The reliance placed by the original authority on Board’s Circular dated 06.05.2011 is misplaced. The said Circular is not on the scope of Section 66A. We find that the original authority has misdirected in his finding despite of his recognition of the Indian establishment of NOC BV as service provider. - Demand set aside - Decided in favor of assessee. - ST/41069/2013 - FINAL ORDER NO. 41015/2016 - Dated:- 14-6-2016 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s M/s. ABB Lummus Crest Ltd.,) to avail Project Management Services. The said company later assignment the agreement to M/s. Netherland Operating Co., BV, Netherlands (NOC BV). NOC BV has established a Branch in India recognized by RBI, Income-tax and Company Law. The Indian establishment of NOC BV is also registered with service tax. The issue involved in the present appeal is that the appellant in terms of the agreement as stated above availed Project Management Services from NOC BV through th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

1 and imposed equal amount of penalty on the appellant under Section 78. 2. The learned counsel for the appellant assailed the impugned order mainly on the following grounds:- (a) Provisions of Section 66A has no application in their case. Though the agreement is with NOC BV, Netherlands, the services are rendered through Indian establishment of NOC BV, who raised the bills for the services along with the service tax applicable. This much has been recognized by the department also. The value for .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ices in India. Further, the tax payment by Indian entity has not been disputed. Such tax remittance has been confirmed by the jurisdictional officer vide his letter dated 15.12.2014 addressed to Commissioner (AR), CESTAT. (c) The imposition of equal penalty under Section 78 is totally untenable and without support of law. 3. The learned Authorised Representative opposed the submissions of the appellant and reiterated the findings of the original authority. He submitted that when the agreement an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version