9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 737X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he name of advertiser as M/s Zapak Digital Entertainment Ltd. (the appellant). Name of the advertising agency is mentioned and is an agent in the said invoice. In the said circumstances, there is no doubt that the invoices of the broadcaster is issued in the name of Zapak Digital Entertainment Ltd. and not in the name of Mudra Radar as alleged in the notice. Reliance placed on the decision of the case of Marigold Coatings [2016 (5) TMI 10 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT], wherein it was held that duty credit cannot be taken on the strength of endorsed invoice. It can be seen that the instant case is not a case of endorsed invoice. A perusal of invoice clearly shows that the appellant’s name mentioning as a advertiser and therefore it is an invoice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vice Tax availed in respect of invoices to broadcaster issued in respect of advertisement of appellant broadcasted by the broadcaster. The demand was confirmed by the Commissioner and a penalty was also imposed under section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellants are before Tribunal. 2. Learned Counsel for the appellant argues that they engaged the advertising agency for advertisement, who in turn, organizes a broadcaster for carrying the advertisement. The advertising agency has asked to charge their own fee as well the reimbursement of the amount paid to the broadcaster for carrying their advertisement on behalf of the appellants. He argued that while they pay the fee to the broadcaster of the advertis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... invoices. In respect of Service Tax paid by Mudra Radar on the agency commission they have taken credit on the invoice of Mudra Radar. In respect of Service Tax paid on the broadcasting fee collected by SIP and paid by the appellants through the advertising agency on the strength of invoices of the SIPL. Learned Counsel argued that in such circumstances credit cannot be denied. 3. Learned AR relies on the impugned order. He argued that the tax paid by the advertising agency to the broadcaster i.e. SIPL was an input services by the advertising agency and not for the appellants. Learned AR argued that the invoice was not raised by the broadcaster on the appellant but the invoice was raised by the broadcaster on advertising agency. In thes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It is seen that the said decision of the Tribunal was overruled by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Vimal Enterprises as reported in 2006 (192) ELT 267 (Guj) . Learned AR has also relied on the decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Marigold Coatings (supra ), wherein it was held that duty credit cannot be taken on the strength of endorsed invoice. It can be seen that the instant case is not a case of endorsed invoice. A perusal of invoice clearly shows that the appellant s name mentioning as a advertiser and therefore it is an invoice issued in the name of the appellant. The advertising agency in the instant case is only act as a conduit for payment. 5. In these circumstances, we do not find any m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
