Just a moment...

Report
ReportReport
Welcome to TaxTMI

We're migrating from taxmanagementindia.com to taxtmi.com and wish to make this transition convenient for you. We welcome your feedback and suggestions. Please report any errors you encounter so we can address them promptly.

Bars
Logo TaxTMI
>
×

By creating an account you can:

Report an Error
Type of Error :
Please tell us about the error :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home /

2008 (1) TMI 90

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....L entered into an agreement with JIPM for receiving "Total Productive Maintenance" (TPM) from JIPM during the period 28-2-99 to 16-8-2002. In terms of the agreement STL was liable to pay taxes due from JIPM in India. The original authority found that TPM came under the category of Management Consultancy service. After due process of law, the Assistant Commissioner demanded service tax from STL/JIPM and imposed penalties. 2. The ld. Counsel for the appellants reiterated the grounds taken in the appeal. It is submitted that the service provided by JIPM came under 'Intellectual Property' which was not liable to service tax at the material time. As 'Intellectual Property' was brought under the tax net subsequently the demand on....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....herein received instruction from the Japanese Company in getting familiar with the technical information as per the agreement. The Tribunal decided in that case that the consideration paid to the Japanese Company was for transfer of Intellectual Property rights and not for any consultancy services. Another decision of the Tribunal relied on is the case of Aditya Cement v. CCE reported in 2007 (7) S.T.R. 153 (Tri.-Del.) = 2007 (218) E.L.T. 116 (T). In that case the Tribunal had decided that where the appellants received services from an Engineering Consultant who did not have an office in India and was based in a foreign country, the tax paid by the appellant was due to be refunded to it. As per Section 68 of the Finance Act, 1994, a service....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion. It is a tool intended to enhance the productivity of an establishment on a continuing basis. The technology is transferred through audio and video devices as patented Intellectual Property. TPM is a patented technique and intellectual property transferred for consideration to STL for its use. Intellectual Property became a taxable service much after the material period. Therefore, the same activity engaged in by JIPM cannot be taxed as 'Management Consultancy' during the material period. The material period terminates prior to 16-8-2002. Services rendered by persons based abroad were subject to tax during the material period. From the records, it is seen that the tax for consideration for the services was paid by STL, as an as....