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 roaming charges paid to foreign telecom operators for providing international roaming connectivity to subscribers abroad were chargeable to service tax under the head of Business Auxiliary Service and, if not, whether the related demand of tax, interest and penalty could be sustained.
Analysis: The charges were paid for connectivity services enabling subscribers to use telecom facilities while abroad. Such services were held to be correctly classifiable as telecommunication service. During the relevant period, taxability attached only to telecommunication services provided by a Telegraph Authority, and foreign telecom operators did not fall within that expression under the Finance Act, 1994 read with the India Telegraph Act, 1885. The same issue had already been settled in earlier decisions holding that a service specifically covered under the telecommunication entry could not be shifted to Business Auxiliary Service merely to fasten tax liability. On that basis, the demand was found unsustainable, and the connected demand of interest and penalty also failed.
Conclusion: The demand under Business Auxiliary Service was not sustainable and was set aside, with consequential relief from interest and penalty.
Ratio Decidendi: A service specifically falling within the telecommunication service entry cannot be reclassified and taxed under Business Auxiliary Service merely because the foreign provider is not a Telegraph Authority.