2024 (4) TMI 471 - AT - Service Tax

Classification of service - sale of space and time for advertisement service or not - agreement for sponsorship with M/s.SPIC Ltd. - HELD THAT - The very same issue was considered by the Tribunal in the case of appellant in THE TAMILNADU CRICKET ASSOCIATION VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX, CHENNAI 2018 (2) TMI 235 - CESTAT CHENNAI , the Tribunal had analyzed the facts of the case and came to the conclusion that the activity does not fall under the category of sale of space or time for advertisement and there is advertisement carried out. The agreements are more akin to sponsorship service. During the relevant period the sponsorship services for sports was excluded from the levy of service. The Tribunal after appreciating the facts had held that the amount received as per sponsorship agreements for boxes and stands are not leviable to tax under Sale of Space for Advertisement and requires to be set aside. The demand cannot sustain and requires to be set aside - Appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issue in this case revolves around the demand raised under the category of 'sale of space and time for advertisement' and whether it is legal and proper.

Comprehensive Details of the Judgment:

Issue 1: Demand under 'sale of space and time for advertisement' category

The appellant, engaged in conducting cricket matches allotted by BCCI, was found to not pay appropriate service tax under 'sale of space for advertisements' for a specific period. The department issued a show cause notice proposing to demand service tax, interest, and penalties. The original authority and Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the demand. The appellant argued that the activity falls under sponsorship services, not 'sale of space for advertisements,' as no actual advertisements were displayed. They cited similar cases where the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant. The Tribunal analyzed the sponsorship agreement and concluded that the activity was more akin to sponsorship services, which were exempt from service tax during the relevant period. Therefore, the demand under the 'sale of space and time for advertisement' category was set aside.

Conclusion:
After reviewing the facts and previous decisions, the Tribunal found that the demand was not sustainable and set it aside, allowing the appeal with any consequential relief.