2008 (12) TMI 97

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Respondent. ORDER 1. This is an appeal filed by the revenue. The respondents are a public sector undertaking. The revenue has obtained clearance from the Committee on Disputes to pursue the appeal. 2. M/s. BHEL had received technical know-how under an agreement entered into with M/s. Turbo Leftechnik Gmbh (TLT) during the period 2002-03. In a show-cause notice issued on 20-4-2004 it ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....receipt of technical know-how from TLT was not value for service classifiable under consulting engineer's service. 3. In the instant appeal the revenue has taken the ground that the service received was appropriately classifiable under the category 'consulting engineer service'. An appeal filed by the Department against the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE v. Veleo Friction Material ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....) SPIC Pharmaceuticals Division v. CCE [Final Order No.75 of 2008, dated 1-12-2008]. It is also submitted that a Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Hindustan Zinc Ltd. v. CCE [2009] 18 STT 67 (New Delhi-CESTAT)(LB), had decided that a recipient of any service from a person based abroad was not liable to pay service tax as a recipient of service before 1-1-2005 when such category of per....