2023 (2) TMI 830 - AT - Service Tax

Levy of Service Tax - Support Services of Business or Commerce or not - providing the Chepauk Stadium and assisting in the conduct of the Indian Premier League (IPL) twenty over cricket matches by M/s. India Cements Ltd. - case of the Department is that the said amount is a consideration received by the appellant from the BCCI for providing the Chepauk Stadium for conduct of IPL cricket matches - HELD THAT - The Department has not been able to produce any evidence to show that there was an understanding between the appellant and the BCCI for providing such service for a consideration of Rs.10,00,00,000/-. Further, it is also established that the appellants had provided the Stadium to Chennai Super Kings and had received Rs.50,00,000/- per match, for which they have discharged Service Tax - The definition of Support Services of Business or Commerce has already been noticed above. Unless there is a service provided and a consideration received for the service that has been provided, there cannot be a levy of Service Tax. The decision in the case of M/S VIDARBHA CRICKET ASSOCIATION VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE 2014 (1) TMI 204 - CESTAT MUMBAI (LB) was relied upon by the Learned Counsel for the appellant to argue that cricket associations cannot be considered as business or commercial organizations. In the said decision, the Tribunal relied on the decision in the case of THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF INFORMATION BROADCASTING VERSUS CRICKET ASSOCIATION OF BENGAL ANOTHER 1995 (2) TMI 406 - SUPREME COURT and it was held by the Tribunal therein that sports organizations are not business or commercial organizations; conduct of sports or sporting events and their broadcasting/telecasting is not assertion of commercial rights. Thus, there are no hesitation to conclude that the Department has failed to establish that the appellant has rendered a service falling within the definition of Support Services of Business or Commerce - appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Whether the appellant is liable to pay Service Tax on the amount received from BCCI for providing the Chepauk Stadium for IPL cricket matches.

Analysis:
1. The case involves M/s. Tamil Nadu Cricket Association receiving Rs.10,00,00,000 from BCCI for providing the Chepauk Stadium for IPL matches, categorized as infrastructural support service by the Department.

2. The appellant argued being a non-profit society affiliated with BCCI, receiving IPL subvention money to promote cricket, not providing infrastructural support service to BCCI, but to Chennai Super Kings for matches.

3. The appellant contended that the amount received was financial support, not consideration for promoting matches, and had discharged Service Tax for providing the stadium to Chennai Super Kings.

4. The appellant raised the issue of limitation, stating non-payment was due to a genuine belief that the amount was not taxable.

5. The Department argued that the service provided fell under 'Support Services of Business or Commerce,' citing relevant definitions from the Finance Act, 1994.

6. The Tribunal found that the Department failed to prove an understanding for providing the stadium to BCCI for the amount received, as the appellant had provided it to Chennai Super Kings and paid Service Tax accordingly.

7. Referring to precedent cases, including Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur-I v. M/s. Rajasthan Cricket Association, the Tribunal concluded that the appellant's activities did not fall under taxable services, as BCCI's role in cricket administration is not commercial.

8. The Tribunal set aside the Department's demands, ruling in favor of the appellant, as the Department failed to establish the appellant's liability to pay Service Tax on the amount received from BCCI.

This comprehensive analysis covers the key legal arguments, interpretations, and precedents considered in the judgment delivered by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai.