2015 (7) TMI 233 - AT - Service Tax

Manpower Recruitment Agency - service rendered by the appellant of supplying models for advertising purposes and catering for TV serials/films - Held that - Appellant is only supplying models for advertising of products or TV serials/films and to other modelling agency. If that be so, in our considered view, the definition of Manpower Recruitment Agency during the period 2001-02 and 2002-03 would not cover the services arendered by the appellant of supplying models. - impugned order is unsustainable and liable to be set aside - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Service tax liability on the appellant for supplying models for advertising purposes or actors for TV serials/films under the category of "Manpower Recruitment Agency" during 2001-02 and 2002-03.

Detailed analysis:
1. The appeal was against Order-in-Appeal no. SB(54)54/STC/2009 dated 13.08.2009. None appeared for the appellant, and the issue was considered in the absence of representation.
2. The main issue revolved around whether the service tax liability on the appellant for supplying models for advertising or TV serials/films falls under the definition of "Manpower Recruitment Agency" during the mentioned period. Previous authorities had held the service as taxable.
3. The definition of Manpower Recruitment Agency during the relevant period was crucial. The original definition under section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994 was cited, and it was noted that the definition was later amended on 16.06.2005.
4. The first appellate authority had relied on a trade notice to rule against the appellant, despite acknowledging that the services might not strictly fall under Manpower Recruitment Agency.
5. The Tribunal referred to previous judgments in Gyarasi Lal & Co. [2009] 19 STT 228[ND-CESTAT] and CST vs. Azur Cyber P. Ltd. [2009] 20 STT 90 (AHD-CESTAT) to support their view that the appellant's service of supplying models did not fall under the definition of Manpower Recruitment Agency during the relevant period.
6. Considering the nature of the appellant's services as only supplying models and not recruitment of manpower, the Tribunal held that the impugned order was unsustainable and set it aside.

Overall, the Tribunal found that the appellant's service of supplying models for advertising purposes or actors for TV serials/films did not fall under the category of "Manpower Recruitment Agency" during the period in question, as per the relevant legal definitions and precedents cited.