https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343410 Reverse charge service tax liability for alleged import of design and engineering consultancy from China required proof that a taxable service was actually received from abroad and that payment was made for that service. The record indicated that the recipient's case was that only equipment had been imported, with no payment shown for design or engineering consultancy, while the Revenue relied mainly on the agreement and a proforma invoice. In the absence of verification of foreign remittance or other supporting evidence, mere reliance on those documents was insufficient to establish tax liability, and the demand was held unsustainable. en-us Mon, 08 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Nov 2017 12:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343410 Reverse charge service tax liability for alleged import of design and engineering consultancy from China required proof that a taxable service was actually received from abroad and that payment was made for that service. The record indicated that the recipient's case was that only equipment had been imported, with no payment shown for design or engineering consultancy, while the Revenue relied mainly on the agreement and a proforma invoice. In the absence of verification of foreign remittance or other supporting evidence, mere reliance on those documents was insufficient to establish tax liability, and the demand was held unsustainable. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 08 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343410