TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 831X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the period 18.4.2016 as per the judgment of Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of INDIAN NATIONAL SHIPOWNERS ASSOCIATION VERSUS UNION OF INDIA [ 2008 (12) TMI 41 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] , which was subsequently been affirmed by the Hon ble Supreme Court, UNION OF INDIA VERSUS INDIAN NATIONAL SHIPOWNERS ASSOCIATION [ 2009 (12) TMI 850 - SC ORDER] . Considering the factual matrix, the origina ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MOHANTY Revenue has filed this appeal against the impugned order dated 29.12.2017 passed by the learned Commissioner of Central GST, Bangalore. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. This Tribunal vide Final Order dated 2.2.2016 had remanded the matter to the original authority to quantify the service tax demand pertaining to the period prior to 18.4.2006 and the period after ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... who has his place of business, fixed establishment, permanent address or usual place of residence, in India, such service shall, for the purposes of this section, be taxable service, and such taxable service shall be treated as if the recipient had himself provided the service in India and the same is applicable with effect from 18.4.2006. I find that the services other than technical know how ser ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... towards IPR service received by the respondent after such effective date, holding that, such service was not liable for payment of service tax prior to the period 1.7.2012. 4. On careful examination of the case records, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order passed by the learned adjudicating authority. Hence, we are of the considered view that there is no merit in the appeal filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
