2008 (8) TMI 53

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Final Order No. 942/2008 dt. 5.8.2008 certified on 12.8.2008 in Appeal No. ST/85/2008) Shri P.K. Sahu, Adv. for the Appellant. Ms. Sudha Koka, SDR for the Respondent. [Order per T. K. Jayaraman Member (Technical)] - This appeal has been filed against Order-in-Appeal No. 68/2007-ST dated 30.09.2007 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals-II), Bangalore. 2. The learned Advo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ia and it has been utilized, delivered in India and it is also used in India. The learned Advocate strongly argued that the understanding of the lower authority is not correct, the services have rightly been delivered abroad and they have been used by the Singapore Company. They relied on several case laws. They also stated that it should not be considered that the appellant and the company in Sin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... consider that the service is delivered only to the Singapore Company. The recipient of the service is a Singapore Company. When the recipient of the service is Singapore Company, it cannot be said that service is delivered in India and the benefit of the service is derived only by the recipient company. Because of the booking of the orders, the Singapore Company gets business. Therefore, the serv....