Cce, Kanpur vs M/S Metro & Metro
- CitationService Tax Appeal No. 1134 of 2010 with Cross Objection No. 1 of 2011
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The levy of service tax under Section 66A of the Finance Act, 1994 on services received from a service provider situated outside India cannot be enforced for the period prior to 18.4.2006, because the Supreme Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal against the Bombay High Court decision in Union of India v. Indian National Ship Owners Association, and that dismissal settles the leviability question for that period.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Service Tax Appeal No. 1134 of 2010 with Cross Objection No. 1 of 2011
(Arising out of the Order-in-Original No. 04/ST/Commissioner/2010 dated 23/03/2010 passed by the Commissioner, Central Excise, Kanpur).
For approval and signature:
Honble Mr. Justice G. Raghuram, President
Honble Mr. H.K. Thakur, Technical Member
1 Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 26 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2 Whether it should be released under Rule 26 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?
4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?
CCE, Kanpur . Appellant
vs.
M/s Metro & Metro . Respondent
Appearance:
Shri B.B. Sharma (A.R.) - for the appellant/Revenue.
None - for the Respondent
Coram: Honble Mr. Justice G. Raghuram, President
Honble Mr. H.K. Thakur, Technical Member
Final Order No. 52212/2015 dated 10/07/2015
Per. H.K. Thakur :-
This appeal has been filed by the Revenue with respect to OIO No. 04/ST/Commissioner/2010 dated 23/03/2010 under which demand of service tax, with respect to services received from service provider situated abroad for the period prior to 18/4/06, was dropped. Respondent M/s Metro & Metro filed Cross Objection on the ground that service tax on reverse charge basis under Section 66A of the Finance Act, 1994 cannot be on enforced for the period prior to 18/4/06 in view of Honble Supreme Courts dismissal of Departments SLP vide order dated 14/12/2009 against Bombay High Courts order in the case of Union of India vs. Indian National Ship Owners Association [2009 (13) STR 235 (Bom.)]
2. When the case was called for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the respondent. The written submissions dated 29/6/2015 were received. In the written submission, respondent argued that as per CBEC Circular F. No. 275/7/2010-CX. 8A dated 30th June, 2010 no duty liability under Section 66A was leviable for the period prior to 18/4/2006.
3. Shri B.B. Sharma (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue argued that the entire period involved in this demand is prior to 18/4/2006 when services were provided and service provider is also not situated in India.
4. Heard learned AR and perused the case records. The issue involved in the present proceedings is regarding leviability of service tax where services are provided by a person situated out of India. The issue has been finally settled by Honble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. Indian National Ship Owners Association [ 2009 TIOL 129 SC ST] when Revenue appeals against Bombay High Courts order in the case of UOI vs. M/s Indian National Ship Owners Association (supra), was dismissed. Accordingly the appeal field by the Revenue is dismissed and Cross Objection filed by the respondent is disposed of.
(Operative part of the order pronounced in the open court.)andl
(Justice G. Raghuram)
President
(H.K. Thakur)
Technical Member
PK
??
??
??
??
3
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free