Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S Jbf Industries Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise-Vapi on 16 December, 2015
In The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal West Zonal Bench At Ahmedabad ****
Appeal No : ST/172/2008 (Arising out of OIO-03/OA-ST/VAPI/2008 Dated 24/09/2008 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise-VAPI) M/s Jbf Industries Ltd : Appellant (s) Vs
Commissioner of Central Excise-VAPI : Respondent (s) Represented by:
For Appellant (s) : Shri Sachin Chints, Advocate For Respondent (s): Shri T. K. Sikdar, Authorised Representative For approval and signature:
Mr. P.K. Das, Honble Member (Judicial) Mr. P.M, Saleem, Honble Member (Technical)
1.
Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? No
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
No
3. Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the order?
Seen
4. Whether order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?
Yes CORAM:
MR. P.K. DAS, HONBLE MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Mr. P.M, SALEEM, HONBLE MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Date of Hearing/Decision: 16.12.2015 Order No. A/11850 / 2015 Dated 16.12.2015 Per: P.K. Das After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the records, we find that there is a demand of service tax alongwith interest and penalty for the months of November and December 2005. The appellant is recipient of service from M/s Jafferies International Ltd., New York for merchant banking service. It is seen from the adjudication order that the service provider had no office in India. We find that this issue is covered by the various decisions of the Honble Gujarat High Court and Tribunal and the Board Circular No. 276/8/2009-CX. 8A dated 26.09.2011. It is clarified that applicability of service tax on any taxable service provided by a non-resident or a person located outside India, to a recipient in India, would be leviable after enactment of Section 66 A of the Finance Act, 1994 w.e.f. 18.04.2006.
2. In view of that, the impugned order is set-aside. The appeal filed by the appellant is allowed with consequential relief.
(Dictated & Pronounced in open Court) (P.M.Saleem) (P.K. Das) Member (Technical) Member (Judicial) G.Y 2