TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (2) TMI 409
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the Additional Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai-III Commissionerate. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the appellant are registered with Service Tax under "Consulting Engineer Service". During the period from July 2005 to March 2008, the appellant had received Technical Consultancy Service from various service providers, who were not having their office in India. As per Section 68(2) of the Finance Act, 1994, if the service provider does not have any office in India and his usual place of residence is in a country other than India, then the service receiver who has his business establishment in India is liable to pay Service tax on behalf of the service provider. Accordingly, the appellant had paid the Service tax....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oticee was required to pay Service tax on the actual value of services received by service recipient in terms of Rule 7 of the Service Tax Rules. (iv) that the present situation is revenue neutral. (v) that the process of grossing up is permitted under Section 195A of Income Tax Act. (vi) that no penalty under Sections 76 & 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 is leviable as they have been furnishing information as prescribed by law to the revenue. 4. Personal hearing was held on 10-6-2011. Shri G.V. Shanmugasundaram, Assistant Commissioner (Retd.) appeared on behalf of the appellant at Hosur. Shri Y. Sudhakar Rao, Superintendent, Hosur-II Division, appeared from the Department side. 4.1&emsp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ounds only); this sum being net of all withholding taxes in India (the current withholding tax rate being 20%)". This specific clause means that Foreign Service Provider should get the net amount of GBP 370000. Based on this agreement the appellants had made four payments in July 2005, October 2005, April 2006 and September 2006 at the rate of 92500 GBP per instalment. In other words, whether the appellant pay tax or not, still the foreign service provider is entitled for GBP 370000 in full. Thus, the amount charged by the foreign service provider is 92500 GBP per instalment; that means the tax if any paid by the appellant would have to borne by him and the same cannot be passed on to the foreign party. Thus the gross amount charged by the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion of Section 66A of the Act which took place on 18-4-2006. In this connection, it is pertinent to note that the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the latest judgment in the case of M/s. Unitech Limited v. Commissioner of S. Tax, New Delhi - 2009-TIOL-293-HC-DEL-S.T. = 2009 (15) S.T.R. 385 (Del.) has held as follows : "5. In the present appeal, the assessee is aggrieved only with respect of its liability for the period 1-1-2005 to 15-6-2005. 5.1 In view of the above the following substantial question of law has arisen for our consideration :- Whether the Tribunal misdirected itself in law in coming to the conclusion that the assessee will be liable to pay Service tax for the period 1-1-2005 to 15-6-2005. 5.2 The answer to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the taxable services is deemed to be a service provider. Before enactment of Section 66A, there was no such provision in the Act and therefore, the Respondent had no authority to levy Service tax on the members of the Petitioners association. 21. In the result, therefore, the petition succeeds and is allowed. Respondents are restrained from levying Service tax from the members of the Petitioners association for the period from 1-3-2002 till 17-4-2006, in relation to the services received by the vessels and ships of the members of the Petitioners association outside India, from persons who are non-residents of India and are from outside India. 22. Rule made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs." The above decision by the H....