2018 (2) TMI 148

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....are engaged in the manufacture of 'electrical equipment' and in terms of an agreement with their parent company in France, they were permitted to use the Trademark - "AREVA", for their products sold in India. For this permission to use the Trademark, the appellants paid certain considerations. The service tax liability on such payment, was sought to be confirmed against the appellants, on reverse charge basis, in terms of section 66A of the Finance Act, 1994. The lower authority, confirmed the service tax liability in all the proceedings against the appellants. Penalties were also imposed on the appellants. 2. The learned counsel contesting the findings of the lower authority, submitted that in terms of section 65(55a) and sectio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in the case of M/s. Reliance Industries Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, LTU, Mumbai reported in 2016 (44) S.T.R. 82 (Tri.-Bom.) in the Hon'ble Apex Court. The same has been admitted, though, no stay has been granted. 4. We have heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 5. The only point of dispute is the service tax liability of the appellants with reference to the payment of consideration for usage of Trademark "AREVA", which is owned and registered by parent company of the appellants in France. The lower authority held that registration of Trademark in India is not a pre-requisite for tax liability under Intellectual Property Rights Service. It is further held that such Trademark is recognisable unde....