https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764477 CESTAT Bangalore held that the appellant's activities were not classifiable as Online Information and Database Access or Retrieval (OIDAR) services under section 66A read with section 65(105)(zh) for 2004-2006. Following the United Telecom precedent, the tribunal found that ownership of data is crucial for classification. Since the Singapore entity only maintained network functioning without generating or using data, it did not provide OIDAR services. Therefore, Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM) for service tax was not applicable. Appeal allowed. en-us Fri, 13 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Jan 2025 16:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764477 CESTAT Bangalore held that the appellant's activities were not classifiable as Online Information and Database Access or Retrieval (OIDAR) services under section 66A read with section 65(105)(zh) for 2004-2006. Following the United Telecom precedent, the tribunal found that ownership of data is crucial for classification. Since the Singapore entity only maintained network functioning without generating or using data, it did not provide OIDAR services. Therefore, Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM) for service tax was not applicable. Appeal allowed. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 13 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764477