https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329559 The Appellant successfully appealed against the Order-in-Original confirming a demand and imposing a penalty under the Finance Act, 1994. The Appellant's argument that the payment of royalty should not be considered as Consulting Engineers Services was accepted. It was held that Service Tax on royalty was only payable after the introduction of a specific provision in the Act. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Appellant, allowing their appeal, while dismissing the Revenue's appeal for penalty enhancement. Service Tax liability under the Reverse Charge Mechanism for the period in question was clarified based on relevant precedents. en-us Mon, 09 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Jul 2016 13:11:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329559 The Appellant successfully appealed against the Order-in-Original confirming a demand and imposing a penalty under the Finance Act, 1994. The Appellant's argument that the payment of royalty should not be considered as Consulting Engineers Services was accepted. It was held that Service Tax on royalty was only payable after the introduction of a specific provision in the Act. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Appellant, allowing their appeal, while dismissing the Revenue's appeal for penalty enhancement. Service Tax liability under the Reverse Charge Mechanism for the period in question was clarified based on relevant precedents. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 09 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329559