2022 (3) TMI 635

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t, 1985 and registered with the department for payment of service tax under the category of GTA, BAS, Online Data Information Service etc. During the course of audit, it was observed by the audit officers that appellant is receiving the taxable services from outside India and incurred the expenditure in foreign currency. Revenue initiated proceedings against them to demand and recover service tax not paid under reverse charge mechanism during the period 2006-07 to 2008-09. Proceedings initiated against the appellant culminated in the impugned order resulting in confirmation of Service tax liability of Rs. 45,42,521/-. A penalty under Section 76,77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1944 was also imposed. Aggrieved, the appellant is before this foru....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ny cannot be taxable service under reverse charge mechanism. Further place of provision of service itself in in a nontaxable territory, so does not attract service tax under reverse charge mechanism. 2.1 He further submit that extended period of limitation cannot be invoked in the instant case for the period 2006-07 to 2008-09 as there has not been any willful suppression or misstatement of facts with intent to evade payment of tax. He placed reliance on the following judgments: * Lakshmi Engineering Works Vs CCE [1989 (44) ELT 353 (T)] * Pushpam Pharmaceuticals Company Vs CCE [1995 (78) ELT 401 (SC)] * Jai Prakash Industries Ltd. Vs CCE 2002 (146)ELT 481 (SC)] * Nestle India Ltd. Vs CCE 2009 (235)ELT 577 (SC) * Padmini Products ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y Appellant. The provisions of Section 66A read with Rule 2(1)(d)(v) of Service tax Rules, 1944 are applicable in the instant case. Therefore under reverse charge mechanism, the recipient of service i.e. appellant is liable to pay service tax. 4. We have considered the submissions made by both the sides and perused the records. As regard the "Acquisition Expense" the Learned Commissioner has confirmed the demand on the ground that these are not in the nature of Legal Consultancy Service as the appellant could not produce any documentary evidence and therefore the service tax was confirmed under "Business Support Services". We find that the services received from the same service provider, part of the same accepted as a Legal Consultancy Se....