GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
What's New Case Laws Highlights Articles News Forum Short Notes Statutory TMI SMS More ...
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2017 (4) TMI 901 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2017 (4) TMI 901 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - Business Auxiliary Service - agreement with holding company for providing promotional activities - Held that: - The issue involved in this case is no more res-Integra in view of the decision in the case of [2016 (7) TMI 1209 - CESTAT NEW DELHI], while examining the scope of Export of Service Rules, 2005 with reference to BAS, where it was held that destination has to be decided on the basis of place of consumption, not the place of performance of servi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

roviding marketing and general liaison support services to its holding company M/s. Singapore Telecommunication Limited, located in Singapore. The appellant had entered into the agreement with its holding company for providing the services namely, Promotional activities to market the Sing Tel brand, solely to create awareness of the Sing Tel brand in India; assisting in liasing with bilateral partners to promote goodwill and working relations; assisting in coordinating the provision of general p .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

onfirming the service tax demand and imposing penalties on the appellant. In support of confirmation of the adjudged demand, the Ld. original authority has held that the services provided by the appellant do not satisfy the requirement of clause (b) of proviso to Rule 3(i) of the Export of Service Rules, 2005. Feeling aggrieved with the impugned order, the appellant has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal. 2. The ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that Business Auxiliary Se .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eported in [2014] 51 taxmann. Com 104 (New Delhi - CESTAT) (TM). 3. On the other hand, the ld. AR appearing for the respondent reiterated the findings recorded in the impugned order and further submitted that the conditions of the Export of Service Rules, 2005 have not been satisfied by the appellant inasmuch as the services are provided and consumed both within the territory of India. 4. Heard both sides and perused the records. 5. The short question involved in this appeal for consideration by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

imited are categorized under the taxable service of Business Auxiliary Service. The appellant did not discharge the service tax liability during the disputed period on the ground that the services were exported by it and as such, were not liable to service tax under sub-rule (3) of Rule 3 of the Export of Service Rule, 2005. 7. In order to fulfill the conditions of sub-rule (3) of Rule 3 ibid, the primary requirement is that the service recipient should be located outside India; and the service .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rding the findings of the adjudicating authority that even though the service recipient was based in Singapore, since it has a Pan Asia presence including India, the conditions of Rule 3(3) ibid has not been satisfied, we are of the view that such observations will not hold good for confirmation of service tax demand, for the reason that the recipient of such service is the overseas entity and such service were for use in or in relation to its business activities. Further, even if M/s. Bharti Te .....

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 Group India Pvt. Ltd. [2016 (45) S.T.R. 120 Tri.- Del.]. The Tribunal referred to various earlier decisions and held: 5. On the first issue relating the appellants liability under BAS it is now a well settled legal position that the service involved is in fact exported out of India and there is no service tax liability. In M/s. Paul Merchants Ltd. v. CCE, Chandigarh reported in 2013 (29) S.T.R. 257 (Tri. - Del.) it is held that what constitutes export of service is to be determined strictly w. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Latest Notifications:

    Dated      Category

20-7-2017 Cus (NT)

20-7-2017 GST CESS Rate

19-7-2017 IT

19-7-2017 IT

18-7-2017 IT

18-7-2017 CE (NT)

18-7-2017 CE

18-7-2017 GST CESS Rate

15-7-2017 Kerala SGST

14-7-2017 Andhra Pradesh SGST

14-7-2017 Cus (NT)

14-7-2017 Cus

13-7-2017 Co. Law

13-7-2017 Co. Law

13-7-2017 ADD

13-7-2017 ADD

12-7-2017 Jammu & Kashmir SGST

12-7-2017 Gujarat SGST

12-7-2017 Gujarat SGST

12-7-2017 CGST Rate

More Notifications


Latest Circulars:

19-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

19-7-2017 Income Tax

18-7-2017 Customs

17-7-2017 Customs

14-7-2017 Income Tax

13-7-2017 Central Excise

13-7-2017 Customs

13-7-2017 Central Excise

13-7-2017 Customs

7-7-2017 Income Tax

More Circulars



|| 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