9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (1) TMI 32X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sunil Kumar, SDRs, for the Revenue, [Order per: P. K. Das, Member (Judicial)] - Common issue involved in these appeals, therefore, all are being taken up together for hearing. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of yarn and exported the same. The appellants paid commission to the foreign based commission agent for procuring the orders who have no office in India. Service Tax was demanded on the payment made to the commission agent. The period of dispute is July, 2004 to 15.6.2005. 4. The Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Hindustan Zinc Ltd. vs. CCE, Jaipur, reported in 2008 (11) STR 338 (Tri.-LB) has held that the taxable service provided by a non-resident or from outsi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtion of Section 66A w.e.f. 18.4.2006. Therefore, the appellant's contention that the demand on services relating to identified offshore services cannot be subjected to service tax during the relevant/period is acceptable. 7. As we find that the issues in the present appeal are squarely covered by the decision in the case of Foster Wheeler Engergy Ltd. cited supra, following the same, we allow the appeal with consequential relief. Inasmuch as we are allowing the appeal on merit, we are not going into the issue of limitation." 5. Learned Advocate submits that the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Indian National Shipowners Association vs. UOI, reported in 2008-TIOL-633-HC-MUM-ST has held that levy of service tax on a person who is r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 66A it is apparent that there was no authority vested by law in the Respondents to levy service tax on a person who is resident in India, but who receives services outside India. In that case till Section 66-A was enacted a person liable was the one who rendered the services. In other words, it is only after enactment of Section 66-A that taxable services received from abroad by a person belonging to India re taxed in the hands of the Indian residents. In such cases, the Indian recipient of the taxable services is deemed to be a service provider. Before enactment of Section 66-A, there was no such provision in the Act and therefore, the Respondent had no authority to levy service tax on the members of the Petitioners-association. 21. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
