https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173595 The case involved determining whether the technical know-how fee/royalty paid to foreign collaborators by the respondents was subject to service tax. The Commissioner (Appeals) and CESTAT concluded that the payments were for the transfer of technology, constituting a transfer of property rather than a service transaction. The agreement did not support the imposition of service tax on the royalty payments. Relying on relevant case law and definitions of "royalty," the Revenue's appeal was dismissed as they failed to establish that the payments were for services, leading to the rejection of the demand for service tax. en-us Wed, 28 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Sep 2015 10:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173595 The case involved determining whether the technical know-how fee/royalty paid to foreign collaborators by the respondents was subject to service tax. The Commissioner (Appeals) and CESTAT concluded that the payments were for the transfer of technology, constituting a transfer of property rather than a service transaction. The agreement did not support the imposition of service tax on the royalty payments. Relying on relevant case law and definitions of "royalty," the Revenue's appeal was dismissed as they failed to establish that the payments were for services, leading to the rejection of the demand for service tax. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 28 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173595