2018 (8) TMI 1520 - AT - Service Tax

Business Auxiliary Services - activity of sale and purchase of the SIM Cards of BSNL - Held that - The issue has been decided by this Tribunal in appellants own case VOICE TELESYSTEM CHOPRA FERTILIZER AND PESTICIDES TRADING CO. VERSUS CCE ROHTAK 2016 (9) TMI 488 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH where it was held that the appellant is not liable to pay service tax under the category of Business Auxiliary Services on the commission received by them on sale and purchase of SIM Cards. The activity of sale and purchase of the SIM Cards on behalf of BSNL on the commission received by them is not chargeable under the category of Business Auxiliary Services - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against demand of Service Tax under 'Business Auxiliary Services' for sale and purchase of SIM Cards of BSNL.

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chandigarh involved an appeal against the demand of Service Tax under the category of 'Business Auxiliary Services' for the sale and purchase of SIM Cards of BSNL. The Tribunal considered the fact that the issue had been previously decided in the appellants' own case in a Final Order dated 14.07.2016. Referring to the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Idea Mobile Communication Ltd., the Tribunal emphasized that the value of SIM Cards does not need to form part of the activation charges. The Tribunal also mentioned a case involving Martend Food & Dehydrates Pvt. Ltd., where it was held that the activity of purchase and sale of SIM cards belonging to BSNL, where BSNL had already discharged the service tax on the full value of the SIM Cards, does not amount to providing business auxiliary services. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal with consequential relief for the appellants.

The Tribunal reiterated that since the issue had already been settled in favor of the appellants, the activity of sale and purchase of SIM Cards on behalf of BSNL, along with the commission received, is not chargeable under the category of Business Auxiliary Services. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were allowed with any consequential relief deemed necessary. The judgment concluded with the order being dictated and pronounced in the court by the concerned authority.