TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (12) TMI 1187
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion is of providing services of scientific or technical consultancy services. Accordingly, demand was confirmed. 2. Shri P.G. Mehta, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the transaction as per the facts of the present case is one time transfer of technical know-how along with supply of microbial strain for the manufacture of final product namely lovastatin by M/s Lupin Ltd. He submits that since it is a transfer of technical know-how it cannot be classified under scientific or technical consultancy services. The sale of technical know how does not attract Service Tax. He placed reliance on the following judgments: 1. Matrix Laboratories Ltd. v/s. CC & CE, Hyderabad-00 2008(9) STR-15 (Tri-Bang.) 2. Korpan L....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e not exceeding 240 hrs. Average of 5 shake flasks would be taken for the purpose of calculating the guaranteed titre. 5.0 TERMS OF PAYMENT LUPIN agrees to pay to CONCORD a total sum of Rs. 25.0 lacs in consideration of the entire scope of work as per this agreement as given below: a) Rs. 15.0 lacs against handing over of lyophils/Cryovials (5 nos.) and slants the 'Strain' and the technology package, pilot scale process know-how, re-isolation and testing process, analytical method etc. to LUPIN. b) Rs. 10.0 lacs against satisfactory laboratory scale demonstration within 7 days. c) If the fermentation titre achieved in 240 hrs of cycle time is less than 7.0 gms/lit. as Mevinolinic Acid against USP Refer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ow-how, the same is not liable to Service Tax as held in the various judgments as cited by the Ld. Counsel. In the case of Matrix Laboratories Ltd., the Tribunal (Bang.) held as under: "Fact: 2. The appellant's contention is that they did not come within the category of "Scientific or Technical Consultancy Services (STC)". They are leading pharmaceutical company in India and they are engaged in the manufacturing and marketing of pharmaceutical products and diagnostics in India. They develop technology for the manufacture of Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients (APIs), which they have sold on valuable consideration to their clients M/s. Ranbaxy. There is no service provided therein continuously in terms of the agreement but it is a comple....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ltd. It is not the case that they received any commission for the services rendered in the form of consultation fee. This is a case of transfer of technology without holding any rights and receipt of valuable sale consideration. In such a circumstance, the view taken by this Bench in the rulings rendered by this Bench and other Benches, as cited by the Counsel and noted supra, would apply to the facts of the case. The judgment of BSNL is clearly distinguishable, as the issue therein pertains to levy of Sales Tax in respect of goods which were sold. It is not the situation in the present case. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the impugned order. The impugned order is not legal and proper in the light of the citations noted. Hence, the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in detail. The appeal filed by the Revenue, mainly relies on supplementary agreement dated 8 September, 1999 and Clause 7 of the shareholders agreement dated 29 January, 2000 in support of the contention that the agreements under consideration were not merely for the sale of technical know-how, but they have also provided consulting engineer service in the form of technical advice, consultancy, etc. There is no dispute that the respondents had sold the technical know-how required for the manufacture of various products involved in the agreements. The question to be decided is whether other two agreements have resulted in change of the nature of the transaction. The learned SDR had relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in Indian Farmers ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he respondents should have done with the staff who are engaged in marketing and other activities, which were no longer required to be undertaken by them, consequent to the sale of technical know-how and their activity being limited only to the manufacture and transfer of goods to the purchasers. It is quite clear from the terms of the agreement and the details, after the transfer of know-how, the respondents took up only manufacturing activity, and the remaining activities were taken over by the purchasers of the technical know-how. It is also the submission of respondents that the purchasers of the technical know-how were not required to get all the goods manufactured only by the respondents as per the agreement. But they were free to get ....