9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1357X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assed by the Commissioner (Appeals), vide order dated 9.4.2013, Annexure A.9 recorded that the assessee was not assessed to service tax on any transaction involving sale of space for advertisement in print media. It was concluded that the activity of the appellant-assessee fell within the taxable service of “advertising agency”. - service tax amounting to ₹ 7,11,804.78 and Education cess of ₹ 3692.90 for the period 1.4.2001 to 31.12.2005 had been rightly imposed on the assessee-appellant besides recovery of interest on the confirmed demand - No illegality or perversity in the impugned order so as to call for interference by this Court - Decided against the assessee. - STA No.9 of 2014 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 10-8-2015 - MR. AJAY ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2.2005, the learned CESTAT has illegally relied upon the taxing provision under Section 65(105) (zzzm) of the Act, which came into existence w.e.f 1.5.2006? iv) Whether the impugned order passed by the learned CESTAT is illegal and contrary to the provision of law as enumerated under section 65(105)(e) of the Act and Central Board Circular dated 5.11.2003 vide which the liability to pay service tax for space selling in the field of advertisement was kept out of service tax net? v) Whether the demand of service tax against the Sundry debtors and credit notes where amount was not realized, is against Rule 6 of the ST Rules and the same is in violation of the principles of natural justice? 2. A few facts relevant for the decision of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal before the Tribunal. Vide order dated 9.4.2013, Annexure A.9, the appeal was allowed and the order dated 14.11.2007 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) was set aside. Hence the instant appeal by the assessee-appellant. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and do not find any merit in the appeal. 4. The adjudicating authority vide order dated 2.7.2007, Annexure A.5 confirmed the demand of service tax amounting to ₹ 7,11,804.78 and education cess of ₹ 3692.90 for the period from 1.4.2001 to 31.12.2005 under Section 73(2) of the 1994 Act by invoking extended period of limitation. Recovery of interest on the confirmed demand under Section 75 of Chapter V of the 1994 Act was also ordered. The Commissioner ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cument, hoarding or any other audio or visual representation made by means of light, sound, smoke or gas'. Sub section (3) of Section 65 defines advertising agency as meaning any person engaged in providing any service connected with the making, preparation, display or exhibition of advertisement and includes an advertising consultant . Sub section 105 of Section 65 read with clause (e) thereof defines a taxable service (in the context) as a service provided to any client, by an advertising agency in relation to advertisement, in any manner and clause (zzzm) of Section 65 (105) defines the relevant taxable service as service provided to any person, by any other person, in relation to sale of space or time for advertisement, in any man ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5. Further, as pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondents, in the adjudicating order dated 2.7.2007, Annexure A.5, in answer to the question whether the appellant collected service tax from its clients on all the bills raised by it, Mrs. Shaifali Singh, partner of the assessee made statement on 23.8.2006 wherein it was stated that it received 15% commission from the newspapers on gross business with them and collected service tax on that commission from its clients on the bills raised by it. The relevant portion read thus:- Q.5: How do you raise bills to your clients and collect Advertising charges and whether it includes service tax? How do you arrive at the taxable value for payment of service tax? Have you collected ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
