Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Court rules service tax on services by non-residents to Indian recipients effective only from 18.4.2006</h1> <h3>Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs Versus Bayer´s Diagnostics (I) Ltd.</h3> Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs Versus Bayer´s Diagnostics (I) Ltd. - [2012] 36 STT 717 (Guj.), 2013 (31) S.T.R. 543 (Guj.) Issues Involved:1. Applicability of service tax on services provided by non-resident commission agents to an Indian recipient before and after the enactment of Section 66A of the Finance Act, 2006.2. Validity of the Tribunal's decision based on the Bombay High Court's ruling in Indian National Shipowners Association v. Union of India.3. Legality of the imposition of service tax on the recipient of services from abroad prior to the enactment of Section 66A.Detailed Analysis:1. Applicability of Service Tax on Services Provided by Non-Resident Commission Agents:The respondents, engaged in manufacturing diagnostic kits, received services from Overseas Commission Agents, which fall under 'Business Auxiliary Services.' Initially, these services were exempt from service tax per Notification No. 13/2003/ST, but became taxable after Notification No. 8/2004-ST. Since the agents were non-residents without an office in India, the liability to pay service tax was on the respondents under Rule 2(d) read with Rule 6 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. A show cause notice was issued demanding service tax for the period from 9.7.2004 to 31.3.2006.2. Validity of the Tribunal's Decision:The Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal held that service tax on services received from foreign providers could not be recovered from the Indian recipient before 18.4.2006. This decision relied on the Bombay High Court's ruling in Indian National Shipowners Association v. Union of India, which stated that service tax could not be levied on service recipients in India for services provided by non-residents before the enactment of Section 66A of the Finance Act, 2006. The Tribunal dismissed the department's appeal, affirming the appellate commissioner's order.3. Legality of Imposition of Service Tax Prior to Enactment of Section 66A:Section 66A of the Finance Act, 2006, effective from 18.4.2006, made services received from abroad taxable in the hands of Indian recipients. The Bombay High Court in Indian National Shipowners Association held that before this enactment, there was no legal provision to levy service tax on Indian recipients for services provided by non-residents. The Supreme Court upheld this view, affirming that service tax could only be levied after the enactment of Section 66A. The Central Board of Excise and Customs also issued a circular accepting this legal position, stating that service tax liability on services provided by non-residents to Indian recipients arises only from 18.4.2006.Conclusion:The High Court dismissed the tax appeal, agreeing with the Tribunal and the Bombay High Court's interpretation. It confirmed that no substantial question of law arises, as the legal position was clear that service tax on services provided by non-residents to Indian recipients could only be levied from the date of enactment of Section 66A, i.e., 18.4.2006. The parties were directed to bear their own costs.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found