AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) 
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (7) TMI 550
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....For the Appellant : Shri Shashi Mathews, Adv For the Respondent : Shri Kishore Kunal, Adv ORDER Per: R K Singh: Stay Application along with Appeal has been filed against Order-in-Original dated 17.04.2013 in terms of which the service tax demand of Rs. 1,59,95,229/- was confirmed along with interest and penalties. The demand was confirmed under 'Consulting Engineer' service on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...." or by any other name, in the books of account of a person liable to pay service tax, where the transaction of taxable service is with any associate enterprise] [underlined words inserted vide Finance Act 2008, w.e.f. 10th May, 2008]." It stated that prior to 10.05.2008, because they had not 'paid' for the consulting engineer service received from its associate enterprises abroad, no s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that the demand has been raised on the outstanding amount in respect of service from associate enterprises received before 10.05.2005. It is nowhere brought out in the impugned order or in the Show Cause Notice that the outstanding amount as on 10.05.2008 has ever been paid by the appellant. CESTAT in the case of Gecas Services India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) (in para 8) held as under:- "The departmen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n added to Rule 6(1) of Service Tax Rules, 1994 cannot be given retrospective effect. The ratio of the above judgment of the Tribunal is squarely applicable to the facts of this case and just on account of use of the words "for the removal of doubts" in the Explanation to Rule 6(1), this explanation cannot be treated as a clarificatory explanation having retrospective effect. The Apex Court in cas....