https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377585 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant regarding the confirmation of demand under 'Intellectual Property Right Services.' The agreements with Alembic Ltd. and Dabur Pharma Ltd. were crucial in determining the nature of services and tax implications. The application of Section 66(55b) of the Finance Act, 1994 was pivotal, with a precedent establishing that if 'Intellectual Property Right' was sold and not temporarily transferred, the section did not apply. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed based on legal analysis and precedents. en-us Tue, 26 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Apr 2019 09:34:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377585 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant regarding the confirmation of demand under 'Intellectual Property Right Services.' The agreements with Alembic Ltd. and Dabur Pharma Ltd. were crucial in determining the nature of services and tax implications. The application of Section 66(55b) of the Finance Act, 1994 was pivotal, with a precedent establishing that if 'Intellectual Property Right' was sold and not temporarily transferred, the section did not apply. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed based on legal analysis and precedents. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 26 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377585