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>Tribunal Upholds Decision to Drop Tax Demands on Recruitment & Support Services</h1> <h3>Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax Pune – III Versus Cybage Software Pvt. Ltd.</h3> Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax Pune – III Versus Cybage Software Pvt. Ltd. - TMI Issues Involved:1. Taxability of 'manpower recruitment or supply service'2. Taxability of 'support services of business or commerce'3. Taxability of 'offshore development center' services4. Consideration of export services and their taxabilityDetailed Analysis:1. Taxability of 'manpower recruitment or supply service':The primary issue in the first appeal is the adjudicating authority's failure to consider three aspects related to taxability as a provider of 'manpower recruitment or supply service'. The Revenue contended that the adjudication order should have upheld the demand for Rs. 21,59,950 and Rs. 60,71,755 for the earlier period and the amount payable for the period from 1st April 2008 to 15th May 2008. The Tribunal referenced the decision in Cognizant Tech Solutions (I) Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner, LTU, Chennai, which clarified that if the manpower recruited and retained by the appellants are under their management and not supplied to another entity, it does not constitute 'manpower supply'. The Tribunal found that the workforce recruited and retained by the respondent was for providing specialized services, thus not liable for service tax under 'manpower recruitment or supply service'.2. Taxability of 'support services of business or commerce':The second issue revolves around the definition and taxability under 'support services of business or commerce'. The Tribunal noted that the adjudicating authority had dropped the demand for charges related to 'off-site' deployment, accepting that such activities were only taxable from 16th May 2008 when 'information technology or software service' was included in section 65(105) of the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal upheld this view, stating that activities undertaken at the respondent's premises did not fall within the ambit of 'support services of business or commerce'.3. Taxability of 'offshore development center' services:The third issue was whether the operation of an 'offshore development center' for M/s HSBC, taxable under section 65(105)(zzzq) of the Finance Act, 1994, was liable for service tax. The adjudicating authority accepted that the 'offshore development center' was intended to maintain work confidentiality at the respondent's premises, thus relieving them of the tax demand. The Tribunal agreed, noting that the services provided were part of 'information technology software service', which was not taxable.4. Consideration of export services and their taxability:The final issue was the taxability of charges recovered from overseas customers. The adjudicating authority had dropped the demand entirely, accepting that these were exports on which tax liability did not arise. The Tribunal noted that the Revenue did not dispute the finding of export or the non-taxability of services rendered to overseas customers. Consequently, the second appeal concerning tax of Rs. 27,15,68,977 for the period from 1st April 2009 to 31st March 2010 was not considered, as the transactions were accepted as exports beyond the pale of taxation.Conclusion:The Tribunal found no merit in the appeals of Revenue and dismissed them, upholding the adjudicating authority's decision to drop the demands. The Tribunal emphasized that normal commercial transactions and deployment of staff at the respondent's premises for fulfilling contractual obligations could not be construed as taxable services merely because another taxable service had been established. The designation of deployed staff in a segregated portion of the respondent's premises was seen as an extension of 'information technology software service', not subject to tax.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found