2023 (11) TMI 682

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ted 30.03.2016 passed by the Joint Commissioner and rejecting the appellant's appeal. 2. The appellant is engaged in manufacture of scooters and motorcycles and parts thereof. It avails CENVAT Credit on the inputs, capital goods and input services as per CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The appellant received some services from foreign service providers which it had classified as "Intellectual Property services" and paid service charges to the overseas service provider and also paid service tax under reverse charge mechanism on the amounts so paid. During the process, the technical experts of the service provider had to visit India and for that purpose the appellant arranged for their board and lodging. The invoices for the board and lodging w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....appellant, learned Counsel, made the following submissions: (i) The boarding or lodging expenses incurred by the appellant are not includable in the gross amount paid by the appellant for the services which it received from the experts of Honda, Japan. As per Article 6 of their agreement, the appellant had to pay to Honda Motors, Japan a certain amount as consideration. This article 6 is reproduced below: "ARTICLE 6. FEES AND ALLOWANCES FOR DISPATCH OF THE TECHNICAL EXPERTS OF HM AND/OR HM'S DESIGNEE 6.1 In consideration of the dispatch of the technical experts of HM and/or HM's designee hereunder, HMSI shall pay to HM a sum of five hundred twenty five US Dollars ($525) per day, as technical guidance fee for each ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....act and it is not a consideration for services. Therefore, it cannot be considered as a consideration and no Service Tax could be imposed. (v) Extended period of limitation is not invokable as the appellant had been filing all the returns properly and had never declined to provide any information. The entire amount of Service Tax paid was available at CENVAT credit to the appellant and so malafide intent can be attributed. 5. Learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue supports the impugned order. 6. We have considered the submissions on both sides and perused the records. The short question to be answered in this case is whether expenses on board and lodging incurred by the appellant for the visiting technical exp....