TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 1353X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 66A in the Finance Act effective from 18.4.2006, the appellant was required to pay the service tax on such services, so received by them, on reverse charge basis - Held that: - I find that whatever Service tax was required to be paid by the appellant, was available to them as cenvat credit. As such, the entire situation is revenue neutral, in which case, no malafide can be attributable to the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 66A in the Finance Act effective from 18.4.2006, the appellant was required to pay the service tax on such services, so received by them, on reverse charge basis. However, as the service tax liability was not discharged by the appellant, they were informed by the Revenue to do so. Accordingly, the appellant deposited service tax amount along with interest, even prior to issuance of show cau ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o service tax is required to be paid by them. They also submitted that prior to 18.4.2006, they were under no liability to pay the service tax and their bonafide belief continue on account of confusion in the field. They also refer to the Boards Circular No. 36/4/2001 dated 8.10.2001 wherein it was clarified that service provided beyond the territorial waters of India are not liable to service ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tained a bonafide belief that inasmuch as no service is being provided by them in India, no Service Tax liability would arise. Tribunal in the case of Needle Industries (I) Pvt. Ltd. [2010 (17) STR 525 (Tri-Chennai) ] has taken note of the said circular and has observed that though the same has been withdrawn but the same could not lead to the assessee entertaining a bonafide belief. Accor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
