2022 (5) TMI 429

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion, we are of the view that the prayer made in support of out-of-turn hearing of appeal can be considered in the interest of justice. Accordingly, the miscellaneous application is allowed. At this stage, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that the issue arising out of the present dispute is no more res integra in view of the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Indian National Shipowners Association, reported in 2009 (12) TMI 850-SC. Further, he also submitted that by relying upon the said judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court, this Tribunal in the case of the appellant itself, vide Final Order Nos. 21144-21147/2019 dated 27/11/2019 has allowed the appeals in favour of the appel....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y, has held that as per the statutory requirement, the appellant should liable to pay service tax under the provisions of Rule 2(1)(d)(iv) of the Service Tax Rules, 2004 (with effect from 16/08/2002). On the basis of such observations, show-cause proceedings were initiated by the Department against the appellant, which culminated into the adjudication order dated 30/08/2010 (for short, referred to as the 'impugned order') wherein the original authority has confirmed service tax demand of Rs. 42,50,375/- (Forty Two Lakhs Fifty Thousand Three Hundred and Seventy Five only) under the category of BAS and computed such demand for the period 01/01/2005 to 15/06/2005 along with interest. The impugned order has dropped the proposals made in the SCN....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ved from the parent company located abroad, under reverse charge mechanism. For demanding service tax amount, the impugned order has referred to Rule 2(1)(d)(iv) ibid. The issue in dispute came up for consideration before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court, in the case of Indian National Shipowners Association [2008 (12) (TMI) 41 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT], wherein it was held that provisions of Rule 2(1)(d)(iv) ibid cannot create any tax liability which is not authorized by law and that before insertion of Section 66A with effect from 18/04/2006, there was no authority to levy service tax on import of service. It has further been held that Explanation below Section 65(105) ibid did not give any authority to levy service tax on import of service. Agai....