2016 (10) TMI 309

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ore Kumar, Advocates for the appellant Shri Atul Handa, A.R for the respondent ORDER There are two appeals. One by the assessee and another by the Revenue against the same order dated 31.03.2011 of Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana. Both the appeals are taken up together for disposal. 2.  The impugned order found that there is no dispute regarding leviabilty of service tax ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ent of royalty by the bottlers to the appellant-assessee liable to service tax as held by the impugned order. 5.  On examination of both manufacturing/tie up based agreement and royalty based agreement, we find that there are material differences in the scope and application of these agreements. It is noticed that in the case of tie up based agreement, a typical tie-up based manufacturing ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f both agreements, we find that there are substantial material differences and the tie up agreement cannot be considered for service tax liability under the category of royalty payment. We find that though the lower authority noted the contents of both Board's circular dated 27.10.2008 to the effect that tie up based agreements are not covered the IPR services for service tax, he proceeded to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....L 4.  Radico Khaitan Ltd. vs. CST, Delhi-2016 -TIOL-1704-CESTAT-DEL It has been held that in the contract of manufacturing/tie-up agreement, there is no scope for service tax levy on the brand owner. 6.  In B.D.A Ltd. (supra), the Tribunal's decision was taken by the Revenue in appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 30.11.....