2020 (1) TMI 996

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nvat Credit Rules and under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. 2. The appellant M/s. Unimed Technologies Limited entered into separate agreements with M/s. Sun Pharmaceuticals Industry Limited (SPIL) and M/s. Sun Pharma Advance Research Company Limited (SPARC) for carrying out research and development and transfer of developed technology/Know-How for manufacture of various pharmaceuticals products. Accordingly, SPIL & SPARC developed certain technologies for manufacturing of various pharmaceuticals products and sold/transferred such technology to the appellant under five different invoices after payment of Service Tax thereon under the head of Scientific and Technical Consultancy Service. The appellant availed the Service Tax Cre....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tative relied on the impugned order. He particularly pointed out Para 25.8, 25.10 & 25.12 of the impugned order where assertion has been made that the service was exported on the same day when it was received. In these arguments it was asserted by the learned Authorized Representative that this fact of receipt & export of services on same day establishes that the services were not used by the appellant and, therefore, no credit can be allowed of such services. 7. We have gone through the rival submissions, we find that the appellants M/s. Unimed Technologies Limited entered into a contract with M/s. Sun Pharma Global Inc., (SPGI) for supply of certain technology/Know-how. The appellant sub-contracted the generation of this technology/Kno....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd conduct of such research, studies or trials by or on behalf of SPIL." It is also seen similarly the Para 6 prescribes the time schedule of the activity. From the said clauses it is apparent that while the technology was being developed by SPIL. The appellant was directly involved in Supervision and Monitoring even the time schedule and development was being decided mutually. From the above it is apparent that while the technology was being prepared it was being monitored by the appellants themselves which in itself amounts to use of the service. 10. The only fact that revenue has used to insist that the service was provided to the appellant and exported by the appellant on the same day is that the date of invoice is common. It is a....