TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (9) TMI 358
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e "Business Auxiliary Services", "Management, Maintenance or Repair Services, "IPR Services", "Consulting Engineering Services". During the course of audit of the accounts of the appellant in November, 2010, the officers noted that the appellants have provided services relating to marketing or procurement of goods from India and such services were provided to M/s. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries India Ltd., Japan. The Revenue entertained a view that such services rendered by the appellant will fall under the taxable category of "Business Auxiliary Services" and do not qualify as "Export of Service" in view of non-fulfilments of one of the essential conditions viz. receipt of payment in convertible foreign exchange. Accordingly, service tax liab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eceipt of consideration by the appellant will satisfy the condition of receipt in convertible foreign exchange. The demand is also contested on limitation. It is submitted that the fact of receipt of this consideration and other particulars were available in the periodical ST-3 Returns, filed by the appellant. In fact, there were considerable number of litigation on the issue of export of services under the category of "Business Auxiliary Service". Accordingly, it is the submission of the appellant that the demand is not sustainable, as having been issued beyond the normal period. 5. Ld. AR supported the findings of the lower authorities. He submitted that receipt of consideration in Indian currency will not satisfy the condition for exp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o - Mitsubishi UFJ Global Service Banking Division, Japan. The FIRC issued by the appellant's bank in New Delhi clearly certifies that the payment has not been received in nonconvertible rupees. 9. The Original Authority had given, a rather brief finding on this issue. It would appear that the Original Authority is mainly influenced by the payment of service tax by the appellant along with interest after the issue of show cause notice and accordingly, it would appear that he did go into the factual/legal submissions made by the appellant while contesting the tax liability. In fact, he brushed aside the submission of the appellant regarding notification issued by the Reserve Bank of India with reference to receipt of foreign exchange, by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gn currency. The contract, undoubtedly, designates the consideration in Indian rupees. It is claimed by the respondent that this is normally resorted to so that the service provider is not put to loss on account of currency fluctuations and that, by such designation, the producer in India is assured of receiving the contracted amount; undeniably, a necessary factor in minimizing the risk of budgetary overrun. This justification is, unarguably, acceptable as logical. 15. The respondent did produce a certificate from Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd., their bankers, indicating that inward remittance from the overseas entity was in convertible foreign currency. The original authority rendered its findings after acknowledging t....