News Update

Cus - When there is nothing on record to show that appellant had connived with other three persons to import AA batteries under the guise of declaring goods as Calcium Carbonate, penalty imposed on appellant are set aside: HCCongress fields Rahul Gandhi from Rae Bareli and Kishori Lal Sharma from AmethiCus - The penalty imposed on assessee was set aside by Tribunal against which revenue is in appeal is far below the threshold limit fixed under Notification issued by CBDT, thus on the ground of monetary policy, revenue cannot proceed with this appeal: HCGST -Since both the SCNs and orders pertain to same tax period raising identical demand by two different officers of same jurisdiction, proceedings on SCNs are clubbed and shall be re-adjudicated by one proper officer: HCFormer Jharkhand HC Chief Justice, Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra appointed as President of GST TribunalSale of building constructed on leasehold land - GST implicationI-T - If assessee is not charging VAT paid on purchase of goods & services to its P&L account i.e., not claiming it as expenditure, there is no requirement to treat refund of such VAT as income: ITATBengal Governor restricts entry of State FM and local police into Raj BhawanI-T - Interest received u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act 1894 awarded by Court is capital receipt being integral part of enhanced compensation and is exempt u/s 10(37): ITATCops flatten camps of protesting students at Columbia UnivI-T - No additions are permitted on account of bogus purchases, if evidence submitted on purchase going into export and further details provided of sellers remaining uncontroverted: ITATTurkey stops all trades with Israel over GazaI-T- Provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(a) cannot be invoked, where a necessary condition of the money received without consideration by assessee, has not been fulfilled: ITATGirl students advised by Pak college to keep away from political eventsI-T- As per settled position in law, cooperative housing society can claim deduction u/s 80P, if interest is earned on deposit of own funds in nationalised banks: ITATApple reports lower revenue despite good start of the yearI-T- Since difference in valuation is minor, considering specific exclusion provision benefit is granted to assessee : ITATHome-grown tech of thermal camera transferred to IndustryI-T - Presumption u/s 292C would apply only to person proceeded u/s 153A and not for assessee u/s 153C: ITATECI asks parties to cease registering voters for beneficiary-oriented schemes under guise of surveys
 
Tribunal by Majority order sets aside demand of service tax on British Airways - Holds appellant is not liable to pay tax under reverse charge on services of online database access by overseas reservation Cos

By TIOL News Service

NEW DELHI, JUNE 10, 2014: THERE is a demand of service tax on British Airways under Section 66A in respect of services received from outside India from computerized reservation system companies (CRS). Due to difference of opinion between the Member (J) and the Member (T), the matter was referred to the Third Member. Please see 2013-TIOL-1161-CESTAT-DEL

The Member (J) opined:

The appellant having its place of business in India was recipient of online data base access and retrieval thereof to promote its business in India ensuring error free information to the travel agents in India. Who makes payment to the service provider is immaterial and no free service was provided by service provider. What that is material is service received by the appellant which in essence and substance was established. Revenue's arguments that appellant's remittances came to notice of investigation proved quid pro quo is well founded

On limitation also the Member (J) held that the extended period was rightly invoked by the department.

However, the Member (T) held:

For the purpose of Section 66A, the airline head office -'BA, U.K.' and its Indian branch office - BA, India cannot be treated as one entity in view of the provisions of Sub Section 66A, but have to be treated as two different persons. Therefore, it would be wrong to treat the services received from CRS/GDS companies by 'BA, U.K.', as the services received by their Indian branch-BA, India. Similarly the payments made to CRS/GDS companies by 'BA, U.K.' cannot be treated as payments made to CRS/GDS Companies by BA, India or on behalf of BA, India, unless it is proved that the services provided by CRS/GDS companies were Indian branch specific services which satisfied the business needs of BA, India and the role of 'BA, U.K.' was of facilitator only.

On limitation, the Member (T) held that extended period is not attracted.

In view of the difference of opinion, the matter was referred to Third Member. The Third Member held:

M/s British Airways, India has to be treated as a separate person. If that be so, in view of the admitted position that the contract between CRS/GDS companies is not with M/s British Airways, India and is only that M/s British Airways, UK, the present appellant cannot be held to be recipient of the services so as to make him liable to pay service tax, on reverse charge basis, in terms of the provisions of Section 66A. I am in full agreement with Member (T)

On limitation also, the Third Member agreed with the findings of the Member (T).

Accordingly, by majority order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal.

(See 2014-TIOL-979-CESTAT-DEL)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.


Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.