SANDVIK ASIA LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal is being heard in terms of the order passed today in Stay Application No. 1845 of 2008.

(2.) HEARD learned Advocate for the appellant and learned SDR for the respondent.

(3.) AS rightly submitted by the learned Advocate for the appellant, it was not necessary to consider the said issue in detail in the present appeal as the point in that regard stands settled by the decision of the Bombay High Court in Indian National Shipowners Association v. Union of India, [2009] 18 STT 212. In the said petition one of the issue was related to the constitutional validity of Section 66A of the Finance Act, 1994 and the obligation of the assessees under the said Act to pay service tax on a date from which such liability would arise. Dealing with such issues, the Hon'ble High Court in the said case held that"... It appears that it is first time when the Act was amended and Section 66A was inserted by Finance Act, 2006 with effect from 18 -4 -2006, the Respondents got legal authority to levy service tax on the recipients of the taxable service.... It is only after enactment of Section 66A that taxable services received from abroad by a person belonging to India are taxed in the hands of the Indian residents. In such cases, the Indian recipient of the taxable services is deemed to be a service provider. Before enactment of Section 66A, there was no such provision in the Act and therefore, the respondents had no authority to levy service tax on the members of the Petitioners association."