TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the appellant had made out a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in respect of the demand raised on the footing that hiring of transponder capacity from an overseas supplier constituted taxable support service of business or commerce or supply of tangible goods service.
Analysis: The demand was founded on the view that the transponder hiring arrangement fell within the scope of support service of business or commerce and that tax was payable under reverse charge. The Tribunal noted the earlier view that the expression support service of business or commerce is to be construed in its setting and that the principle of noscitur a sociis limits it to services of a supporting nature to the main business, such as customer-related, transactional and office infrastructure services. Applying that approach, the Tribunal found prima facie that hiring transponder capacity for providing uplinking services did not fit that category. The Tribunal also observed that even if the activity were examined as supply of tangible goods service, the condition that the property be physically present in India during use was not satisfied on the facts.
Conclusion: The appellant established a strong prima facie case and was entitled to waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery pending disposal of the appeal.
TaxTMI 
