Service of notice and contractual debt acknowledgment preserved insolvency admission against a corporate guarantor despite limitation and natural just...
Original works exemption excludes standalone boulder transportation, leaving subcontracted railway-project transport services subject to service tax l...
Annual production capacity determinations excluding stenter galleries support refunds for unconstitutional excise levies without an unjust-enrichment ...
Vicarious liability for cheque dishonour requires specific allegations of responsibility and cheque signatory; generic director allegations cannot sus...
IT Resilience Index requires market infrastructure institutions to automate resilience scoring, early warnings, and continuous service-delivery monito...
The CESTAT held that the appellant's services could not be classified as intermediary services for the period July 2012 to March 2014. As per Rule 3 of the Place of Provision of Services Rules, the place of provision was the location of the service recipient outside India. Since payment was received in convertible foreign exchange, the services qualified as export of services u/r 6 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. Consequently, no service tax was leviable, and the demand was set aside. The appeal was allowed.
The CESTAT held that the appellant's services could not be classified as intermediary services for the period July 2012 to March 2014. As per Rule 3 of the Place of Provision of Services Rules, the place of provision was the location of the service recipient outside India. Since payment was received in convertible foreign exchange, the services qualified as export of services u/r 6 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. Consequently, no service tax was leviable, and the demand was set aside. The appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.