TMI Blog2008 (10) TMI 25X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot have any office in India, having been specified as taxable service with effect from 1.1.2005, under Notification No. 36/2004, recipient of such service could not be held liable for paying Service Tax prior to 1.1.2005 - 223-224 of 2007-Cus. - ST/298 AND 299 OF 2008 - Dated:- 13-10-2008 - S.S. Kang, Vice President and Rakesh Kumar Member (Technical) Shri Nupur Mishra, Advocate for the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (3) STR 625. 3. We find that the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Hindustan Zinc. Ltd. (supra) held that taxable service provided by a non-resident or is from outside India, who does not have any office in India, having been specified as taxable service with effect from 1.1.2005, under Notification No. 36/2004, recipient of such service could not be held liable for paying S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... due respect, we are not able to appreciate as to how tax liability which is creature of statute and governed by statutory provisions can be determined or apportioned on the basis of terms of the agreement between two private parties. Be that as it may, the point for consideration in the Supreme Court was whether the service recipient was also liable to pay interest on the service tax. There is no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
