TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 150X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... And Mr. B. Ravichandran, Technical Member B. L. Narasimhan with Shri Narendra Singhvi, Advocates for the appellants Shri K. Poddar and Shr G.R. Singh, A.Rs. for the Revenue ORDER Per B. Ravichandran The appeal is against the order dated 26.4.2010 of Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur I. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of fertilizers , ammonia and other gases. In connection with developing their manufacturing plant, they have entered into various agreements with foreign service provider mainly to provide design, engineering , supervisory and consultancy services. These are broadly either engineering agreement or licence/process agreement. The Department enter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the findings of the lower authorities and stated that there is mention regarding at least two of the agreements with foreign companies that they had applied for patent in India in 2003. Though the application has not been allowed, as and when the same is granted, the appellant will be liable to service tax. 5. We have heard both sides and examined the appeal records. The only point for decision is that whether or not the appellant received taxable service under the category of Intellectual Property Right service during the relevant period. The admitted facts of the case are that the technical know-how, engineering design licence involved in these agreements with foreign service providers are not registered in India under Indian law. Ho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ngalore - 2016 VIL 480 CESTAT BLR ST [ para 6.7.1] ; e) Reliance Industries Ltd. vs. C.C.E. S.Tax, Mumbai 2016 TIOL 1654 CESTAT MUM [ para 2]; 7. It has been held that to be categorized for service tax purpose under IPR, such right should have been registered with trade mark/patent authority. In the present case, admittedly, there is no right recognized as IPR under any law for the time being in force in India. As such, there can be no provision of IPR service for tax liability on reverse charge basis. 8. In view of the settled legal position as held in various decisions of the Tribunal discussed above, we find that impugned order is without merits and accordingly set aside the same. The appeal is allowed. - - TaxTMI - TMI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
