2012 (6) TMI 191 - AT - Service Tax

Taxability of commission received from the Print Media under the head business auxiliary services - Held that - In view of decision rendered in case of P.Gautam & Co. 2011 (9) TMI 392 (Tri) it is held that the discounts/incentives received by the assessee from the print media will not be liable for service tax under the category of advertising agency services. If that be so, the said discounts/incentives itself cannot be considered for the purpose of taxability under the head business auxiliary services as the amounts which are received are in respect of the services provided under the category of advertising agency services and the amount are discounts and incentives and not as charges for services - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues involved:
Tax liability on commission received from Print Media under 'business auxiliary services'.

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad pertains to a stay petition filed for the waiver of pre-deposit of service tax liability confirmed by the adjudicating authority, along with interest and penalties. The appeal itself was considered for disposal during the hearing. The main issue revolved around the tax leviability on the commission received by the appellant from Print Media categorized under 'business auxiliary services'. The appellant argued that the service tax liability was incorrectly imposed as "Advertising Agency Services" by the lower authorities, while the Tribunal's previous judgment in the case of P. Gautam & Co. supported the appellant's position. The respondent, on the other hand, reiterated the findings of the lower authorities.

Upon careful consideration, the Tribunal found that the issue was squarely covered by its previous judgment in the case of P. Gautam & Co. The Tribunal noted that the commission received by the appellant from Print Media fell within the scope of the judgment in the mentioned case, thereby ruling in favor of the assessee. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with any consequential relief due to the appellant.

This judgment highlights the importance of precedent and how previous decisions of the Tribunal can significantly impact the outcome of similar cases. It also underscores the necessity of a thorough legal argument supported by relevant case law to establish a strong case in tax matters.