India: Indirect Tax News Update - Volume II Issue VI, June 2015

Last Updated: 19 October 2015
Article by Bhasin Sethi & Associates

SERVICE TAX

Conduits for lift irrigation systems, involving associated activities like trenching, masonry work, taxable as 'Commercial or Industrial Construction Service' (CICS) prior to June 2007

CESTAT LB, in Lanco Infratech Ltd & Others vs. CC, CCE & ST has held that laying of pipelines / conduits for lift irrigation systems and involving associated activities like trenching, masonry work, are taxable as 'Commercial or Industrial Construction Service' (CICS) prior to June 2007, and not 'Erection, Commissioning or Installation Service' (ECIS)

Additionally, CESTAT opined that construction of canals for water supply, laying of pipelines for a dam project, is to be classified as works contract "in respect of dam" and thus, excluded from scope of 'Works Contract Service' (WCS) u/s 65(105)(zzzza) of Finance Act

According to LB, turnkey / EPC contract enumerated in clause (e) of Explanation (ii) u/s 65(105)(zzzza) is a "descriptive and ex abundati cautela drafting methodology", and consequently, since essential character of such Turnkey / EPC contract is laying of pipelines / conduits, classifiable under clause (b) of said Explanation w.e.f. June 2007.

CESTAT also held that such contract "would not be exigible to service tax if the rendition of service thereby is primarily for non-commercial, non industrial purpose."

CESTAT further observed that, "This is the only possible and harmonious interpretation possible of the several clauses under Explanation (ii) of Section 65 (105)(zzzza), a distinct taxable service defined with constituent elements thereof substantially drawn from elements of pre-existing taxable services like ECIS, CICS or COCS; and other services when bundled to amount to turnkey/ EPC."

Comments: The decision is important as it has been clarified that services rendered to Govt (under turnkey / EPC contractual mode) is not taxable.

Service tax exemption on commission paid to overseas agents for procuring textile export orders: Chennai Tribunal

Chennai Tribunal in the case of Texyard International & Others vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Trichy & Others granted service tax exemption under Notification No. 14/2004-ST on commission paid to overseas agents for procuring textile export orders, thereby rejecting Revenue's demand for service tax payment under reverse charge mechanism.

CESTAT observed that as per said Notification, Business Auxiliary Services (BAS) were exempt if they related to agriculture, printing, textile processing or education.

Further, CESTAT observed that the expression 'textile processing' must be understood in broader sense, commission paid to overseas agents is in respect of promotion of export sales, which is an activity incidental / auxiliary to processing of textile goods and therefore, constitutes BAS u/s 65(19) of Finance Act

Lastly, CESTAT observed that even if tax payable under reverse charge, input service credit available and may be refunded under Notification No. 41/2007, hence the situation revenue-neutral.

Comments: The judgment comes as a relief for most textile companies.

Input credit of cement & steel used in construction of jetty, to a port service provider allowed

Recently, the Gujarat HC in Mundra Ports and Special Economic Zone Limited vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs allowed input credit of cement & steel used in construction of jetty, to a port service provider.

The HC rejected Revenue's contention that construction of jetty being exempt service, credit is unavailable under Rules 2(k) and 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules. HC observed that since assessee had constructed jetty through a contractor in port premises by supplying the said material, input credit would be available thereon. HC further clarified that amendment to Rule 2(k) is w.e.f. July 7, 2009 and the same is not clarificatory in nature meaning it would operate prospectively.

Comments: This decision is important as it concedes that input can be availed for cement used in construction of jetty.

Sales marketing and promotion services received from foreign entity fall within the definition of 'Business Auxiliary Services'

In Tech Mahindra Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise , Pune - III, Mumbai CESTAT upheld partial service tax demand on IT Co. towards sales marketing and promotion services received from foreign entity. CESTAT held that such activities fell within the definition of 'Business Auxiliary Services', taxable from 2003 onwards.

CESTAT held that as assessee was 'deemed service provider' under Sec 66A, he is liable to service tax on reverse charge basis.

CESTAT further held that in terms of clear, unambiguous language used in Sec 66A, liability is attracted when taxable services is received from foreign service provider and service recipient is situated in India, hence, assessee is required to declare transactions in statutory returns filed u/s 70 of Finance Act. However, CESTAT clarified that demand prior to April 2006 was unsustainable in view of Bombay HC decision in Indian National Shipowners' Association.

Comments: This decision is of note to companies importing marketing and promotion services.

CESTAT allows refund of input service credit against export of services albeit receipt of consideration in Indian Rupees

In Sun-Area Real Estate Pvt. Ltd vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai-I, Mumbai CESTAT observed that allowed refund of input service credit against export of services albeit receipt of consideration in Indian Rupees.

CESTAT observed, "...when a foreign bank is maintaining Indian rupees in their account, obviously, such Indian rupees was obtained in lieu of foreign exchange..."

Comments: This decision is important to importers receiving payment for services in Indian Rupees through FIRCs.

CENTRAL EXCISE

Amendment to Rule 11(2) of Central Excise Rules, 2002, only provides an additional facility for direct transport of goods : CBEC Clarifies

CBEC has issued clarification on scope and purpose of amendment to Rule 11(2) of Central Excise Rules, 2002, which allows consignee to avail CENVAT credit basis registered dealer's invoice in case of direct despatch from manufacturer or importer.

It has been clarified that the amendment only provides an additional facility for direct transport of goods from manufacturer or importer to consignee and obviates need for goods to be brought to registered dealer's premises for subsequent transport to consignee

The Clarification states that the provision stipulated under previous Circulars pertaining to credit availment on strength of original manufacturer's invoice would continue unless any amendment is made to Rule 9 of CENVAT Credit Rules or to registration requirement.

CBEC has stated that the amendments are meant to improve ease of doing business and should be harmoniously interpreted with existing rules and circulars in conformity with legal provisions, keeping the intention of the Government in mind.

Comments : The CBEC clarification is aimed to bring ease in doing business and by relaxing the provisions by way of amendment or otherwise is a step closer in that direction.

CENVAT Credit (Third Amendment) Rules 2015 applicable from June 1st: Finance Ministry notifies

The Finance Ministry has notified CENVAT Credit (Third Amendment) Rules 2015 w.e.f. June 1st whilst also amending Rule 6(3), whereby manufacturer of goods / provider of output service opting not to maintain separate accounts, shall be liable to pay an amount equal to 7% of value of exempted services.

The relevant Notifications through which the changes are brought about are Notification No 12_2014 - CE (NT) dated March 3, 2014, Notification No 14_2015 - CE (NT) dated May 19, 2015, Notification No 15_2015 - CE (NT) dated May 19, 2015.

Further, it has been notified that 7% would also be payable where any part of the value of taxable service has been exempted on condition that no CENVAT credit on inputs and input services shall be taken, in terms of second proviso to said sub-Rule.

Also, Notification No. 12/2014-CE (NT) has been amended thereby disallowing refund of unutilized input and input service credit claimed during half year, for providing 'supply of manpower for any purpose or security services' under Rule 5B (refund in respect of services taxed on reverse charge basis).

Comments: This Notification is of importance to everyone who avails CENVAT Credit.

Pre-deposit u/s 35F of Central Excise Act / Sec 129E of Customs Act of adjudged duty or penalty or both to be mandatorily made at the time of filing appeal itself

The Mumbai CESTAT in Shridhar Metal vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Aurangabad has held that pre-deposit u/s 35F of Central Excise Act / Sec 129E of Customs Act of adjudged duty or penalty or both, as the case may be, has to be mandatorily made at the time of filing appeal itself.

CESTAT rejected assessee's contention that pre-deposit cannot be insisted upon since it is at liberty to deposit the amount till appeal is 'entertained', i.e. taken up for hearing and consideration on merit.

CESTAT further elucidated that unlike HC / SC, there is no procedure in appellate Tribunal for motion hearing on appeal admission, such appeal stands admitted and becomes due for consideration on merit the moment it is filed before CESTAT.

Comments: This judgment is of note to everyone.

Interest recovery u/s 11AB of Central Excise Act on suo motu reversal of wrongly availed CENVAT credit barred by limitation

In the case, Kachchh Steels Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Rajkot, Ahmedabad CESTAT held that interest recovery u/s 11AB of Central Excise Act on suo motu reversal of wrongly availed CENVAT credit was barred by limitation.

CESTAT observed that on plain reading of Sec 11AB, it was clear that interest on delayed duty payment arises on determination of liability by Central Excise Officer u/s 11A(2) or on self ascertainment and intimation in terms of Sec 11A(2B).

Further, CESTAT observed that as per Sec 11A(2B), limitation of 1 year to be counted from the date of information of duty payment / credit reversal to Central Excise Officer, whereas show cause notice for interest recovery issued after more than 4 years.

Comments: This judgment is of note to every one.

Recovery proceedings cannot be initiated without issuance of show cause notice

In the case, Dharampal Satyapal Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, Gauhati & Ors., SC held that recovery proceedings cannot be initiated without issuance of show cause notice u/s 11A of Central Excise Act, even if provision inapplicable.

SC held that it is fundamental to take any adverse action against a person, requirement of principles of natural justice must be fulfilled.

While under certain circumstances, natural justice principles may be excluded, nonetheless, "It is not permissible f to jump over the compliance of the principles of natural justice on the ground that even if hearing had been provided it would have served no useful purpose"

SC, at the same time, stated that it cannot be denied that as far as Courts are concerned, that they were empowered to consider as to whether any purpose would be served in remanding the case keeping in mind whether any prejudice would be caused to person against whom the action is taken. In this context, SC observed that since quantification of amount is undisputed, issuance of notice would be an empty formality, hence, the case stands covered by 'useless formality theory'.

SC thus held that, non-issuance of notice before sending communication has not resulted in any prejudice to assessee and it may not be feasible to direct Revenue to take fresh action after issuing notice as that would be a mere formality.

SC rejected assessee's contention that decision in R.C. Tobacco is in conflict with 3 Judge Bench's judgment in J.K. Cotton. SC observed that said argument was not even open to the assessee for the simple reason that the judgment in J.K. Cotton was specifically taken note of and discussed in R.C. Tobacco.

Comments: the decision is important as it validates Natural Justice principles in Central Excise law.

Affixing additional label on cartons received (availing area based exemption) and repacking/labeling imported coco butter, amounts to 'manufacture'

Third Member of CESTAT, in Jindal Drugs Ltd vs CCE Belapur, ruled in favor of assessee and concurred with Member (Judicial) that affixing additional label on cartons received at Taloja plant from Jammu unit (availing area based exemption) and repacking / labeling of imported coco butter, amounts to 'manufacture' in terms of Chapter Note 3 to Chapter 18 of Central Excise Tariff Act.

Third Member observed that, "The argument of the Revenue that labeling or relabeling must enhance the marketability is contrary to the plain reading of note 3 to Chapter 18.....labeling per se will amount to manufacture.....There is no requirement in said note 3 that the labeling should enhance the marketability...."

CESTAT observed that the word "and" appearing between the words "labeling or relabeling of containers" and "repacking from bulk packs to retail packs" substituted by Parliament with "or" to widen the scope of Note 3 and to overcome apex court judgments in Johnson & Johnson and BOC India Ltd, each of the activities covered thereunder are independent and deemed as manufacture.

Comments: This judgment is of note to assessee's receiving goods from different units and claiming area based exemption.

CENVAT credit reversal w.r.t. trading activity on turnover basis where assessee engaged in both manufacturing as well as trading upheld

CESTAT, in SKF India Ltd. & Another v. CCE, Pune, upheld CENVAT credit reversal w.r.t. trading activity on turnover basis where assessee is engaged in both manufacturing as well as trading.

CESTAT relied on Mercedes Benz ruling and rejected assessee's contention that demand should be recomputed on basis of Rule 6(3D) of CENVAT Credit Rules w.e.f. April 2011.

Comments: This judgment is of note to companies involved in both trading and manufacturing.

CUSTOMS

Test reports based on samples (for determining ash content of coking coal) not reliable if samples drawn against procedure prescribed in law

SC, in the case Tata Chemicals Ltd & Another vs. Commissioner of Customs (P), set aside CESTAT's order, and held that test reports based on samples (for determining ash content of coking coal) is not reliable if samples were drawn against procedure prescribed in law.

SC held that the entire chemical analysis was ultra vires Sec 18(b) of Customs Act. Further, SC borrowed rationale from its own judgments in Bombay Oil Industries and Delhi Cloth & General Mills to hold that, if procedure for testing under Custom Acts not mentioned, Indian Standard Institution's method applicable.

SC observed that CESTAT ought to have realized that there can be no estoppel against law, and if law required something be done in particular manner, it must be done in that manner or it has no existence in eye of law at all.

SC further held that expressions such as "deems it necessary", "reason to believe" used in Statutes do not mean subjective satisfaction of concerned officer, such power not arbitrary and must be exercised in accordance with restraints imposed by law.

Comments: The decision is of note because it reiterates the important rule that there can be no estoppel against law.

LCDs imported for use in electricity supply meters classifiable under Chapter Heading 9013 as "Liquid Crystal Devices not constituting articles provided for more specifically in other headings"

In a recent case, Secure Meters Ltd vs Commissioner of Customs, SC set aside CESTAT order, and classified LCDs imported for use in electricity supply meters under Chapter Heading 9013 as "Liquid Crystal Devices not constituting articles provided for more specifically in other headings".

Further, SC rejected Revenue's application of Rule 3 of General Rules of Interpretation of First Schedule.

SC observed that a plain reading of Note 2(a) to Chapter 90 clarified that LCDs used as parts in final product, viz. electricity supply meters, are classifiable under respective specific heading, which is given under 9013.

SC further held that Note 2(b), as relied by Revenue, relates to 'other parts and accessories', i.e., it applies to those parts and accessories for which Note 2(a) is inapplicable.

SC also observed that as per Part-III of Chapter Notes to Chapter 90, general rule will not apply where parts and accessories which in themselves constitute 'article' fall in any particular heading of the Chapter, such view is fortified by Explanatory Notes issued by World Customs Organisation, as per which, LCD is covered by 'other devices' mentioned in 9013.80

Comments : This ruling is important for companies importing LCD for use in electricity supply meters.

1% Extra Duty Deposit demand on related party import of electronic automation parts quashed

In the case, Beckhoff Automation Pvt Ltd vs. Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai, Mumbai Tribunal quashed 1% Extra Duty Deposit demand on related party import of electronic automation parts, absent finalisation of assessment under 'special valuation' within prescribed period.

The Tribunal relied on CBEC Circular No. 11/2011-Cus and Bombay HC decision in E.I. Dupont India Pvt Ltd and remanded the matter to Adjudicating Authority to re-determine if assessee-supplier relationship actually influenced the import price, in view of assessee's explanation that higher discount vis-à-vis independent buyer, was on account of after sales support provided to customers in India by assessee.

Tribunal also held that mere passing of discount by supplier to importer is a normal commercial practice, and does not necessarily conclude that discount has been passed on account of the relationship.

Comments : The judgment is of note to importers of electronic automation parts.

Services using helicopter to oil companies for transportation of person, materials to/from various oil rigs qualifies as 'non-scheduled passenger services'

CESTAT, in Global Vectra Helicorp Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai, observed that on reading the definition of Air Transport Service under Rule 3(9) with the definition of Scheduled Air Transport Service under Rule 3(49), it was evident that in order to classify as the 'non-scheduled passenger service', the service must be for transportation of persons or things for remuneration, operating to a single flight or a series of flight which must be opened to the members of the public and must not operate as per the published scheduled or time table and / or with regular and systematic flight.

Comments : The judgment is of note to transport companies.

VAT

No case of understatement of tax liability in revised return where entire tax along with interest paid

HC, in Indus Towers Ltd. vs. State of Karnataka, allowed assessee's petition and held that there is no case of understatement of tax liability in revised return where entire tax is paid along with interest.

Further, HC set aside penalty u/s 72(2) of Karnataka VAT Act and observed that being unable to ascertain turnover due to software issues at Head Office, assessee initially filed a 'nil' return so as to comply with return filing requirement by due date and later filed revised return when correct facts and figures were available. HC held that Sec 72 provides that a dealer who furnishes a return which understates his liability to tax by more than 5% of his actual liability to tax, shall be liable to penalty equal to 10% of amount of such understated tax

HC also observed, "Once a revised return has been filed and accepted by the Department, the original return gets obliterated and the only return which remains for consideration would be the revised return, as there cannot be two live returns pending consideration of the Department"

Comments: The said judgment is of importance, on a pan India scale.

Correct to allow Input Tax Credit (ITC) if goods sold at price lower than that shown in VAT invoice : Rajasthan HC

Rajasthan HC, in Commercial Taxes Officer, Ajmer vs. Sharda Agencies, dismissed Revenue's petition and held that there was no perversity or illegality in Tax Board's order allowing Input Tax Credit (ITC) where goods sold at price lower than that shown in VAT invoice.

HC held that discount / incentives received from wholesaler / manufacturer on account of turnover by way of credit notes, which was separately shown by assessee, and same is not in conflict with Rajasthan VAT Act.

Comments: The said judgment is of importance to dealers claiming input tax credit (ITC) on the basis of VAT invoice.

Agreement with DTC to give bus on hire for plying on specified routes, as per specified schedule, not a 'transfer of right to use of goods'

Delhi HC, in Hari Durga Travels vs Commissioner of Trade & Taxes, Delhi, granted relief to Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) bus operator by holding that agreement with DTC to give bus on hire for plying on specified routes, as per specified schedule, not a 'transfer of right to use of goods', and hence not liable to VAT.

HC observed that bus owner bears responsibility for any mis-happening or accident, commits to be bus owner at all times, holds registration and licenses in its favour, in which case, it cannot be said that effective control and possession of vehicles transferred to DTC.

Comments: The said judgment is of importance to transport corporations.

Deduction of quarterly 'turnover discount' given to dealers by way of credit notes from "sale price" u/s 2(m) of Delhi Sales Tax Act upheld

Delhi HC, in MRF Ltd vs Commissioner of Trade and Taxes, upheld deduction of quarterly 'turnover discount' given to dealers by way of credit notes from "sale price" u/s 2(m) of Delhi Sales Tax Act, thereby rejecting Tribunal findings that deduction allowable only in respect of 'cash discounts', not any other 'trade discount'.

HC disallowed assessee's claim for inter-state sale to third party, since goods were transferred from its office in one State to another pursuant to declaration in Form F and duly entered in stock register, and no material furnished to show that such movement was for purposes of / pursuant to eventual sale of goods.

Comments: The judgment is of note as deduction of quarterly 'turnover discount' has been upheld.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Bhasin Sethi & Associates
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Bhasin Sethi & Associates
Related Articles
 
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions