<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2006 (2) TMI 707 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288133</link>
    <description>A foreign supplier that merely provided design, engineering drawings, specifications and technical know-how was not rendering advice, consultancy or technical assistance as a professionally qualified engineer or engineering firm, so the activity did not fall within consulting engineer service for service tax purposes. The demand also could not be sustained against the non-resident supplier because it had no office in India, the notice was served after the amendment on which liability was sought to be shifted to the recipient, and the earlier provision had been deleted. On that basis, the service tax demand was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 May 2020 10:54:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=613381" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (2) TMI 707 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288133</link>
      <description>A foreign supplier that merely provided design, engineering drawings, specifications and technical know-how was not rendering advice, consultancy or technical assistance as a professionally qualified engineer or engineering firm, so the activity did not fall within consulting engineer service for service tax purposes. The demand also could not be sustained against the non-resident supplier because it had no office in India, the notice was served after the amendment on which liability was sought to be shifted to the recipient, and the earlier provision had been deleted. On that basis, the service tax demand was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288133</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>