1. Para
No.
Commissio
nerate
Name of the
Unit M/s
Ministry's Further comments Vetting comments of O/o PDA (C),
Bangalore
14.9.3 Bangalore-I Motor
Industries Co.
Ltd.
Sl.
No.
Name of the
assessee
Period
covered
Amount (Rs.) OIO
No.
Remarks
1 M/s Motor
Industries Co.
Ltd.
16.8.02
to
31.3.03
62,39,114/- 275/04
dt.
14.9.04
Review SCN is yet to be
issued
Final outcome awaited
2 M/s Motor
Industries Co.
Ltd.
7.7.97 to
15.8.02
4,94,26,122/- 276/04
dt.
14.9.04
SCN was issued to the
service receiver in India. The
case has been dropped and
there is no legal ground to
issue any SCN as there is no
tax liability on the service
receiver in India prior to
16.8.02
Service Tax on Import of Services
came into existence from 16.08.02.
The objection was prior to that so
the reply of the Ministry is
acceptable. Para is proposed for
closure.
3 M/s Motor
Industries Co.
Ltd.
1.4.03
to
30.12.03
47,74,659/- 30/04
dt.
16.6.04
The order-in-original covers
the entire period. However,
since the assessee had paid
R & D Cess to the extent of
Rs. 45,47,294/- the balance
amount of Rs. 2,27,365 was
confirmed alongwith
interest and imposition of
penalty.
Reply of the Ministry is acceptable.
Para is proposed for closure.
14.12 Bangalore
Zone
Aravind
Fashions Ltd.
SCN No.
IV/09/301/0
4 ST Adjn.
Dt. 28.6.04
On scrutiny of the records, it is found that there is no legal ground to issue any review
SCN for the following reasons:-
1) SCN was issued to the service receiver. The issue relates to activity of licensing of
technical know how, which would be classifiable under services viz. Intellectual Property
Services, which came into effect from 10.9.04
2) Since SCN had been issued to the service provider prior to 16.8.02, the service receiver
M/s Aravind Fashions is not liable for payment of Service Tax for the period prior to
16.8.02
3) Since it is a case of transfer of technology and payment of royalty for manufacture of
goods, falling under Intellectual Property Services (w.e.f. 10.9.04), the case was dropped
Service Tax on Intellectual Property
Services came into existence from
10.9.04. The objection was prior to
that so the reply of the Ministry is
acceptable. Para is proposed for
closure.
2. Dy. Director/RA-Central
Aravind
Fashions Ltd.
OIO No.
299/04 dt.
24.9.04
Though it was reported earlier that the review SCN is under process, on scrutiny of
records, it is reported that there is no legal ground to issue any review SCN for the
reason that it is a case of transfer of technology and payment of royalty for manufacture
of goods. Such activity would not come within the purview of Consulting Engineer
Services, but Intellectual Property Services (w.e.f. 10.9.04)
Service Tax on Intellectual Property
Services came into existence from
10.9.04. The objection was prior to
that so the reply of the Ministry is
acceptable. Para is proposed for
closure.
Banner
Pharma Caps
India Ltd.
On scrutiny of records, it is found that there is no legal ground to issue any review SCN
for the following reasons:-
i) SCN was issued to the service receiver. The case is not a sale of technical knowhow,
but only licencing thereof and the amount paid was the royalty of the manufacture of
goods. Such activity would not come under the perview of Consulting Engineer Services
ii) Prior to 16.8.02, foreign service provider was liable for payment of service tax.
Service Tax on Import of Services
came into existence from 16.08.02.
The objection was prior to that so
the reply of the Ministry is
acceptable. Para is proposed for
closure.
Bio-Con India
Ltd.
Review SCN is being issued Finality of Adjudication of SCN is
awaited.
L & T,
Komatsu
SCN was issued to M/s Komatsu, Japan and not to M/s L & T Komatsu (Indian Co.). On
scrutiny of records, it is reported that there is no legal ground to issue any review SCN
for the following reasons:-
i) Service rendered outside India will not be liable to Service Tax, which has been clarified
by circular 36/04/2001 dt. 8.10.01. Further, the notice being a foreign service provider,
the Board is examining the issue of notification under Sec. 11C for waiver of tax liability.
Decision of the Board to issue
notification for waiver of tax
liability u/s 11C is awaited
Goetze India
Ltd.
Appeal against OIA 193/04 dated 15.12.04 pending in CESTAT Final outcome of the appeal
pending at CESTAT is awaited
Kirloskar
Electric Co.
It has been reported that the said Service charges, were in the nature of reimbursement
of travel expenses towards deputation of assessee's personnel to site and hence do not
fall under the category of Consulting Engineer and therefore does not attract Service Tax
Reply of the Ministry is acceptable.
Para is proposed for closure.
Kirlosker
Batteries
No further comments desired ------
