2008 (6) TMI 32

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ts. The Commissioner, by the impugned order has -  (a) confirmed the service tax demand amounting to Rs. 44,47,045 against the appellant under 1st proviso to section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994, along with interest at the applicable rate on this amount; and (b) Imposed penalties of (i)Rs.44,47,045 under section 78 (ii) Rs. 1,000 under section 77 and (iii) an amount equal to 2 per cent of the service tax payable per month till the date of payment of the outstanding service tax, under section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994; On the ground that during the period from 10-9-2004 to 30-9-2006, the appellant received the taxable service of Intellectual Property rights as defined under section 65(105)(zzr), read with section 65(55a) of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ction cannot be taxed as IPR under section 65(55a) read with section 65(105)(zzr) an IPR was brought within service tax net with effect from 10-9-2004. Moreover when the transaction took place, the service receiver in India from an offshore service provider was not liable to pay the service tax.  (iv) The demand has not been computed correctly as cess amounting to Rs. 3 1,94,334 paid in term of Research & Development Cess Act, 1986 is liable to be adjusted with the service tax liability under Notification No. 17/2004-ST, dated 10-9-2004. (v) The extended period has been wrongly invoked as there was no suppression of facts. A substantial portion of demand is time-barred. 2.2 Shri R.K. Verma, the learned Departmental Representat....