<?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>Scientific and technical consultancy tax fails where inter-governmental technology transfer does not involve a qualifying technical provider.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99933</link>
    <description>Payments to Rosoboronexport under an inter-governmental technology-transfer arrangement were not taxable as scientific or technical consultancy, because the service definition requires advice or technical assistance from a scientist, technocrat, or a science or technology institution, and Rosoboronexport was only a governmental intermediary. The Tribunal relied on earlier co-ordinate Bench rulings on the same agreements and noted that no contrary evidence was produced, so the service tax demand and related penalty were set aside. The management, maintenance and repair service demand remained undisturbed because it was not contested, and the Department&#039;s challenge to penalty waiver failed since Section 80 was rightly applied for reasonable cause.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 May 2026 08:31:08 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 May 2026 08:31:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=902803" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Scientific and technical consultancy tax fails where inter-governmental technology transfer does not involve a qualifying technical provider.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99933</link>
      <description>Payments to Rosoboronexport under an inter-governmental technology-transfer arrangement were not taxable as scientific or technical consultancy, because the service definition requires advice or technical assistance from a scientist, technocrat, or a science or technology institution, and Rosoboronexport was only a governmental intermediary. The Tribunal relied on earlier co-ordinate Bench rulings on the same agreements and noted that no contrary evidence was produced, so the service tax demand and related penalty were set aside. The management, maintenance and repair service demand remained undisturbed because it was not contested, and the Department&#039;s challenge to penalty waiver failed since Section 80 was rightly applied for reasonable cause.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 May 2026 08:31:08 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99933</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>