https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236122 The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, granting waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery for the adjudged dues. It found that the services provided by the subsidiary company did not qualify as "scientific or technical consultancy service," and the appellant could not be considered a "client" of the foreign company prior to the amendment. The tribunal agreed with the appellant's arguments, emphasizing the availability of CENVAT credit and the possibility of utilizing it for excise duty payment on domestic products. en-us Mon, 03 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Jul 2013 17:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236122 The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, granting waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery for the adjudged dues. It found that the services provided by the subsidiary company did not qualify as "scientific or technical consultancy service," and the appellant could not be considered a "client" of the foreign company prior to the amendment. The tribunal agreed with the appellant's arguments, emphasizing the availability of CENVAT credit and the possibility of utilizing it for excise duty payment on domestic products. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 03 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236122