Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the appellant had made out a prima facie case for stay of recovery of the confirmed demand and penalties on the ground that the technology and patent rights obtained from a foreign entity were not permanently transferred and, in any event, the clarification in the departmental circular excluded IPRs not covered by Indian law.
Analysis: The agreement showed that the appellant received certain patent and technology rights from an entity registered outside India, with only limited rights of modification and with periodic royalty payments for a specified period. On a prima facie reading, the arrangement did not amount to a permanent transfer of the rights. The clarification in para 9.1 of the departmental circular further indicated that only IPRs covered under Indian law were liable to service tax under Intellectual Property Rights Services, and that IPRs not covered by Indian law would fall outside the taxable service.
Conclusion: The appellant established a prima facie case for complete waiver of the confirmed demand and penalties, and recovery was stayed till disposal of the appeal.
Ratio Decidendi: IPRs not covered by Indian law are not chargeable to service tax under the applicable IPR service entry, and a prima facie showing to that effect justifies stay of recovery.