https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768093 The CESTAT Bangalore ruled in favor of the appellant regarding service tax liability on payments for technical know-how, information, assistance and training under Technical Collaboration Agreements. The appellant argued the agreements predated the 10.09.2004 IPR service tax levy and that services didn't fall under IPR scope. Following established precedents including CST vs. Denso Haryana and GE Medical Systems cases, the Tribunal held that technology transfer constituted one-time service performance despite staggered payments, and technical know-how payments weren't liable under IPR service category. The demand for service tax, interest and penalties was set aside. Appeal allowed. en-us Mon, 10 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Apr 2025 08:31:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768093 The CESTAT Bangalore ruled in favor of the appellant regarding service tax liability on payments for technical know-how, information, assistance and training under Technical Collaboration Agreements. The appellant argued the agreements predated the 10.09.2004 IPR service tax levy and that services didn't fall under IPR scope. Following established precedents including CST vs. Denso Haryana and GE Medical Systems cases, the Tribunal held that technology transfer constituted one-time service performance despite staggered payments, and technical know-how payments weren't liable under IPR service category. The demand for service tax, interest and penalties was set aside. Appeal allowed. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 10 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768093