2010 (3) TMI 334

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri K. S. Ravishankar, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Judgment per: K.L. Manjunath, J.].- Revenue has come up in this appeal challenging the legality and correctness of the order passed by the CESTAT in Final Order No.1061-63 dated 15-6-2006 wherein the appeal filed by the respondent-assessee has been allowed by the tribunal by setting aside the order passed by ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s filed raising the following substantial question of law: "Whether during the relevant period, in view of the Board's Circular dated 2-7-1997 the technical assistance and technical know-how received by the respondent from a foreign company did not constitute taxable service viz., Consulting Engineer Service?" 3. We have heard the counsel for the parties. 4. Counsel for the appellant ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... contends that the judgment of Supreme Court (sic) (High Court) was taken up by the revenue before the Hon'ble Supreme court and which SLP came to be dismissed after hearing the counsel for the parties [2010 (17) S.T.R. J57 (S.C.)]. Therefore he contends that the question of law raised in this appeal is no more res integra, therefore he requests the court to dismiss the appeal. 5. Counsel f....