https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249938 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand for 'Intellectual Property Services' as the agreements did not support this classification. The extended period for the demand notice was deemed unjustified due to the absence of deliberate suppression of facts by the appellant. The nature of the agreements was interpreted as commercial arrangements for sales, not for the use of intellectual property. The minimum guaranteed margin was considered a business arrangement, not 'royalty.' en-us Wed, 15 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Jan 2015 18:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249938 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand for 'Intellectual Property Services' as the agreements did not support this classification. The extended period for the demand notice was deemed unjustified due to the absence of deliberate suppression of facts by the appellant. The nature of the agreements was interpreted as commercial arrangements for sales, not for the use of intellectual property. The minimum guaranteed margin was considered a business arrangement, not 'royalty.' Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 15 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249938