TaxTMI Login
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
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal rules against service tax on software maintenance payments</h1> <h3>TFL Quinn India Pvt Ltd Versus CCCE & ST, Hyderabad - IV</h3> TFL Quinn India Pvt Ltd Versus CCCE & ST, Hyderabad - IV - TMI Issues:1. Tax liability under reverse charge mechanism for payments made by the appellant to their holding company for maintenance of SAP computer software system.2. Applicability of service tax rules pre and post 18.04.2006.3. Classification of software as goods for the purpose of service tax.4. Interpretation of TRU Circular No.334/1/2007-TRU regarding maintenance or repair of computer software.5. Effective date of the explanation regarding computer software as goods for tax purposes.Analysis:1. The appeal challenged the Order-in-Original imposing service tax liability on payments made by the appellant to their holding company for software maintenance. The dispute revolved around the period from 01.01.2005 to 31.05.2007, with the revenue authorities asserting tax liability under reverse charge mechanism for maintenance or repair services.2. The appellant argued that prior to 18.04.2006, the reverse charge mechanism could not be applied due to the absence of Sec.66A of the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal concurred, citing settled law from the Indian National Ship Owners Association case, which established that service tax liability did not arise before 18.04.2006 under reverse charge mechanism.3. Post 18.04.2006, the revenue contended that the service tax liability was valid, supported by the classification of computer software as goods by the Apex Court. The Tribunal acknowledged the software as goods but emphasized that the amendment including software as goods for tax purposes was effective from 01.06.2007, rendering the demands for the period 19.04.2006 to 31.05.2007 unsustainable.4. The TRU Circular clarified that maintenance or repair of computer software falls under service tax, but the Tribunal interpreted this clarification alongside the Larsen and Tubro Infratech Ltd case. The Tribunal highlighted that the explanation regarding computer software as goods was only effective from 01.06.2007, aligning with the appellant's compliance post that date.5. Considering the submissions and legal precedents, the Tribunal held that the demands for the period post 19.04.2006 to 31.05.2007 were unsustainable. The impugned order imposing service tax liability was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, emphasizing the effective date of the explanation regarding computer software as goods for tax purposes.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
