TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (11) TMI 1282
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ents. 2.1 Learned authorized representative contended that the services received by the respondent from their overseas service provider was "Market research services". Learned Authorised Pointed out that the respondent has failed to pay the service tax on the said services provided by their overseas service provider in terms of Notification no. 30/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012. He contended that the value of the said "Marketing Research Services" received by the respondents from their overseas service providers for the period 2012-13 to 2014-15 was Rs. 12,09,86,495/- and the total service tax not paid by the respondent on such service was Rs. 1,49,53,930/- 2.2 It was further submitted by learned Authorised Representative that the respondent was of the view that the said services received by them was not "Market research services" but was "Online Information and database access or retrieval services" and accordingly, no service tax was payable on the said services as the place of provision of sald services, in terms of Place of Provision of Service Rules, 2012, was outside India for the period post 30.06.2012. The respondent further contented for the period 01.04.2012 to 30.06.2012 i.e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e service provider abroad was to collect data and no analysis of the collected data is to be done by the service provider. From the above, it is very clear that the service provider abroad had merely provided raw data in the form of interviews, questionnaires, etc. to the respondent. The nature of raw data which was provided by the service provider abroad to the respondent was nothing but a representation of information, knowledge, facts, concepts or instructions which were being prepared or had been prepared in a formalized manner, and the same was intended to be processed by the respondent. The definition of the term "information" is also very wide and includes "data". Therefore, it can be held that the service provided by the service provider abroad to the respondent was nothing but merely: (i) Providing data/ information; (ii) in electronic form; (iii) through a computer network which is provision of service in the nature of "online information and database access or retrieval services". 2.4 On the basis of above observations the Commissioner (A) ruled that the services received by the respondent from the overseas service providers is "Online Information and Database a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ient are located outside taxable territory hence no service Tax should be levied". iii. It is fact that the Master Service Agreement was executed by M/S. the Nielsen Company Taiwan Ltd., Taiwan and the respondent on 28.03.2013. The Statement of Works issued under the said agreement prescribes the service to be provided as:- Phase One: BTB telephone interview with 10 minutes interview length w/o open-ended Qs. Two waves (pre & post-test) needed 100 samples per wave.  An English questionnaire will be provided. Phase Two: 5 samples per market needed; respondent's recruitment collected base on Phase one pool. 15 minutes opened discussion via a telephone interview An English interview guide will be provided. Further, the said Statement of Works in clause 6 prescribes the deliverable as- Daily Progress report on number of interviews completed Data-ASCII Format Translation Programming English Transcription The respondent entered into agreement with M/s. Dimensions International UAE for execution of the above mentioned workorder. The e-mail sent by Mr.Kushal (of respondent) on 08.05,2013 at 6.20 p.m. to Mr. Malik Shamim of Dimensions Int....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4. It has been argued in the cross objection that audit was conducted on various dates from 09.10.2015 to 04.02.2016 and all the facts were known to the Revenue. It has been argued that the respondents had filed the service tax returns disclosing all material particulars in such returns. The cross objection also relied on the decision in the case of Subhash Khandelwal & Sons vs CCE 2011 (24) STR 461 (Tri-Del) and in case of Uniworth Textiles Ltd. 2013 (288) ELT 161 (SC). It has also been argued that the issue in interpretational in nature and therefore, there cannot be a malafide in the classification adopted by the respondent. For this argument, the Respondent relied on the decision of Tribunal in the case of Hindustan Liver vs CCE 2009-TIOL-1795-CESTAT-DEL and in the case of AEON'S Construction Product Limited 2005 (180) ELT 209 (Tri. Chennai). In the cross objection the ground of Revenue neutrality has also been taken. It has been argued that the entire service tax paid on the services received from service providers abroad would have been available to the appellant themselves as cenvat credit and therefore, there could not have been any intention to evade on the part of the res....