Feedback   New User   Subscription   Demo   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. C.R. Narayana Rao Versus Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai

2018 (2) TMI 829 - CESTAT CHENNAI

Consultancy Engineer Service - whether the appellant is liable to pay service tax for the amount received as professional fees for service rendered for a project outside India? - Held that: - the service was rendered by the appellant for a foreign pr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(3) TMI 29 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT]. - Time limitation - Held that: - SCN dated 30.11.2006 has been issued invoking the extended period, which is not sustainable as the issue was interpretational and had travelled upto the Apex Court. - Appeal a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

AC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Per: Bench The brief facts are that appellant is registered with Service Tax Department under the category of consulting engineer service. The appellant was engaged in providing services namely feasibility of study, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y through M/s. Infosys Technologies, Bangalore. The department was of the view that the appellant is liable to pay service tax on amount received in Indian currency as these are not export of services. A show cause notice was issued proposing to dema .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

osed penalty. In appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the same. Hence this appeal. 2. On behalf of the appellant, Id. counsel Shri M. Masilamani submitted that the service was rendered by the appellant for a foreign project and the professional fees .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(14) STR 289 (Bom.) and as upheld by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2010 (17) STR J57 (SC). It was also argued that the demand is time-barred. That the issue was highly contentious and being interpretational one, the extended period cannot be .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version