COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., BANGALORE Vs. MICO LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH these revenue appeals raises a common question of law and facts and they are taken up together for disposal as per law. The Commissioner (Appeals) in both the appeals has considered the aspect pertaining to transfer of technical know -how by a foreign collaborator to the respondent herein and has held that such transfer of technical know -how or assistance does not come within the ambit of the definition of consulting engineers by levy of service tax. This is not challenged. The findings recorded by the Commissioner in OIA No. 191/2004 -S.T., dated 15 -12 -04 is reproduced herein below :

(2.) LEARNED DR reiterated the grounds and contended that such transfer of technical know -how and assistance has to be treated as coming within the ambit of Consulting Engineers.

(3.) LEARNED counsel submitted that the issue is decided in larger number of appeals in assessee's favour. He files a copy of the Final Order No. 1745 and 1746/06 dated 12 -10 -06 [2007 (6) S.T.R. 173 (T)] rendered in the case of Kirloskar Electric Company which is followed in large number of judgments. He also refers to Amco Batteries Ltd. v. Commissioner of Service Tax, Bangalore Final Order No. 107/07 dated 12 -10 -07 [2007 (7) S.T.R. 598 (T)] wherein also the issue stands decided. Further reference is made to COEN Company v. CCE (Appeals), Mangalore [2006 (2) S.T.R. 488 (Tri. -Bang.)], Navinon Ltd. v. CCE, Mumbai [2006 (3) S.T.R. 397 (Tri. -Mum.) = 2004 (172) E.L.T. 400 (Tri. -Mum)], Bajaj Auto Ltd. v. CCE and C, Aurangabad [2006 (3) S.T.R. 411 (Tri. -Mum.) = 2005 (179) E.L.T. 481 (Tri. -Mum.)].