2009 (1) TMI 191

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Vijay Kumar and Amit Jain, SDRs, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.K. Das, Member (J) (for the Bench)].- Heard both sides and perused the records. 2. The appellant received the services during the period from January, 2004 to July, 2004 and payment was made to the foreign based company, who have no office in India. The appellant paid the tax on such payment under the mistaken impression un....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....4, recipient of such service could not be held liable for paying service tax prior to 1-1-2005 notwithstanding the amendment in Rule 2(1)(d) of the Service Tax Rules under Notification No.12/2004. 18. We thus concur in the view expressed in the case of Aditya Cement and Ispat Industries, supra. The issue is thus answered in favour of the assessee and it is held that as a recipient of the 'consu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....7) S.T.R. 40 (Tri.-Del.). 5. Learned advocate relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. JCB India Ltd. v. CST, Delhi, Final Order No. ST/208/08 dated 6-8-08 [2008 (12) S.T.R. 714 (Tri.-Del.)]. 6. In view of the Larger Bench decision of the appellants own case, we hold that the appellant is not liable to pay service tax. On perusal of the aforesaid decision, we find that in....