TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (11) TMI 701
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (zzzz) 45,42,543/- 7,19,209/- 2,86,281/- 55,48,033/- 2. Tax damages received from Huawei Singapore u/s 65(64) and u/s 65 (105) (zzg) 49,82,169/- 28,26,541/- 10,61,990/- 88,70,700/- 3. Tax on market research agency service u/s 65 (105) (Y) 2,64,41,709/- 0 0 2,64,41,709/- Total 4,08,60,442/- 2. The Contention of the Ld. Counsel for the applicant is that the demand of service tax of Rs. 55,48,033/- has been confirmed under the category of 'Supply of Tangible Goods'. It is the submission that the entry of service tax is attracted only when there is no transfer of effective control and possession of goods. The Ld. Commissioner has confirmed dema....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hich may occur after installation. In some cases, the applicants repairs the goods themselves and gets liquidated damages from their principal supplier located in Singapore and the recovered amount from the principal supplier under the warranty obligations. As the said activity do qualify as Business Auxiliary Service but in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Tribunal in Blue Star Ltd, VS. CST, Mumbai [2014 TIOL 2257 CESTAT Mum.], the applicant has been liable to pay service tax. 4. For the service provided under Market Service Agreement were sought to be tax under the Market Research Service. It is his submissions that the services provided by the applicant under market service agreement are as follows: i. Market Developmen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd to demand service is not sustainable. Further, we find that the applicants were having effective control and possession of goods in question. In such a situation in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Rashtriya Ispat Nigam ltd. (Supra) wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed as under: 3. The High Court after scrutiny and close examination of the clauses contained in the agreement and looking to the agreement as a whole, in order to determine the nature of the transaction, concluded that the transactions between the respondent and contractors did not involve transfer of right to use the machinery in favour of the contractors and in the absence of satisfying the essential requirement of section 5E of the Act, i.e., transfer ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pplicant was having effective control and possession of the goods, therefore, the applicant does not qualify under the category of 'Supply of Tangible Goods Services'. In that circumstances, we are view that service tax is not payable by the applicant under the category of 'Supply of Tangible Goods Services' under the reverse charge mechanism. 9. Demand of service tax has been confirmed under the category of Management of Maintenance or Repair Service for the service provided to the Indian customer of the foreign principal under the warranty service whatever the expensive made by the applicant have been reimbursed from the outside of India. The said services has been provided by the applicants on behalf of the their princ....