2013 (3) TMI 612

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....llant. Shri T. Vishwanathan, Advocate, for the Respondent. ORDER Heard both sides. 2. Revenue filed this appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 168/2005 (JNCH), dated 25-5-2005 whereby the ld. Commissioner upheld the lower adjudicating authority's order. 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case is that the respondent entered into a joint venture agreement with their collaborators M/s. BH....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., who in turn upheld the lower adjudicating authority's order. Hence the appeal. 4. The contention of the Revenue is that in the appeal filed by them before the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) one of the ground was that respondent in reply to the questionnaire admitted that "Royalty payable to GE and BHEL on total net sales value of parts purchased from GE and BHEL respectively." The contention i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hey are not engaged in the manufacture. They are only engaged in providing service to the turbines of the collaborator and in distribution of parts of turbine. The royalty is in relation to service only is not related to the distribution of GE gas turbine spares. Therefore the element of royalty is not includable and the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) order is proper and sustainable. In support of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Further, the Commissioner (Appeals) has vide his order found as under :- "From the above it appears that the respondents have inadvertently submitted in reply to the questionnaire to GVC that the royalty payment is in connection with the spare parts and actually it spears to be related to the services being rendered by them. I also find that there is no mention of any royalty payment in the afo....