Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Don't have an account? Register Here
<h1>Tribunal sets aside demands on various services, remands for further examination. Decision on software maintenance charges deemed unsustainable.</h1> <h3>M/s. UOP India Ltd. Versus CCE, Rohtak</h3> M/s. UOP India Ltd. Versus CCE, Rohtak - TMI Issues involved:1. Demand confirmed on erection, commissioning, and installation services.2. Demand confirmed on royalty income for licensing of technical information/knowhow.3. Demand confirmed on sale promotion and marketing services.4. Demand confirmed on charges paid for maintenance of software.Analysis:1. Erection, Commissioning, and Installation Services:The appellant contested that the demand was based on random scrutiny of only 5 out of 38 agreements, arguing that most agreements were for other services. The Tribunal agreed, setting aside the demand of Rs. 48,72,77,071 and remanding the matter to examine all 38 agreements for a fresh decision.2. Royalty Income for Licensing of Technical Information/Knowhow:The appellant argued that services were received before the introduction of service tax on IPR services. Citing precedent, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, stating that payments made after service provision should not be taxed based on payment dates. Thus, the demand on royalty income was deemed unsustainable.3. Sale Promotion and Marketing Services:The appellant contended that the service was used outside India, invoking relevant precedents. The Tribunal found the demand unsustainable under business auxiliary services due to the service being utilized outside India.4. Charges for Maintenance of Software:The appellant argued that the software was located outside India and used there, making the demand unsustainable. The Tribunal concurred, stating that the service provided and utilized outside India did not warrant taxation.In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside the demands on erection, commissioning, and installation services, royalty income, and marketing support services, remanding the matter for further examination. The demand on charges for maintenance of software was also deemed unsustainable. The adjudicating authority was instructed to decide the issues on merits based on the observations provided.