2006 (7) TMI 13

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... received communication from the consulting engineer that they have office in India, the respondent filed the refund claim with the authorities relying upon Rule 2 (1) (d) (iv) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. The said refund claim was rejected by the adjudicating authority. On an appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the refund claim, hence revenue's appeal. 3. The learned DR submits that the refund claim is not liable to be sanctioned because the department has in their possession letter written by the - Chennai office of foreign consultant indicating that they have not provided any services to the respondent It is also his submission that the respondent in failed to intimate the department regarding the existence of the office in Indi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er to 31st March of a financial year;] (d) "Person liable for paying service tax" means, (i) In relation to [a telephone connection or pager or a communication through telegraph or telex or a facsimile communication or a leased circuit]- (v) substituted regarding who will pay service tax on Transport Agency under Notification No.35/04-ST dated 03.12.04 (applicable w.e.f. 01.01.05) (a) the Director General of Posts and Telegraphs, referred to in clause (6) of Section 3 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (13 of 1885); or (b) the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd., Delhi, a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956); or (c) any other person who has been granted a licence by the Cen....