https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258028 Delay in payment of research and development cess, by itself, was treated as insufficient to deny exemption under Notification No. 18/2002-ST where the cess had in fact been paid and no objection was raised by the administering authority. On that basis, the appellant was found to have a prima facie case for waiver of predeposit in a service tax dispute involving transfer of technology payments to overseas service providers. The remaining portion of the demand was considered to depend on evidence and was regarded as debatable at the interim stage, so recovery of the adjudged dues was stayed during pendency of the appeal. en-us Thu, 11 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 28 Mar 2015 19:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258028 Delay in payment of research and development cess, by itself, was treated as insufficient to deny exemption under Notification No. 18/2002-ST where the cess had in fact been paid and no objection was raised by the administering authority. On that basis, the appellant was found to have a prima facie case for waiver of predeposit in a service tax dispute involving transfer of technology payments to overseas service providers. The remaining portion of the demand was considered to depend on evidence and was regarded as debatable at the interim stage, so recovery of the adjudged dues was stayed during pendency of the appeal. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 11 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258028