9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 550X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Service - demand unsustainable. Time limitation - Held that: - The period covered is from October 1999 to September 2004 and the SCN is dated 12-20/4/2005. Major portion of the demand falls beyond the normal period of limitation - we cannot find fault with the appellant who bonafidely believed that they are not liable to pay service tax and had not discharged the same. It is also to be noted that the appellant has given all the required information as and when called for by the department - extended period not invocable. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - ST/144/2007 - Final Order No. 41516 / 2017 - Dated:- 27-7-2017 - Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from their vendors identified by them like Screen Squeeze, Chennai and M/s. Online Images, Chennai. The appellant do only the framework and lighting wherever is required. The boards are then transported to the places where it has to be erected. He clarified that appellants do not do any designing, visualizing, conceptualizing etc. of the advertisements. Similarly, with regard to IOC, the work undertaken was replacing stickers in the main poles / sign poles / pumps, which are put up at various places by IOC. The schedule of work described the activity which was only supplying and fixing vinyl stickers from translucent film LG / AVERY DENISION/3M make using computerized plotting machines of size 44 x 12 inches and laminating using transparent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellants were engaged merely in manufacture of screen printed products, as per the directions of the advertiser, they cannot be called as an advertising agency in the absence of any creative activity relating to preparation, making and display of advertisement. The Board s Circular referred above was relied by the Tribunal in the said decision. However, the said judgment was reversed by the Hon ble High Court of Kerala as reported in 2009 (13) STR 593 (Ker.). In appeal before the Hon ble Supreme Court, the same was reversed setting aside the order passed by the Tribunal as well as the High Court and remanded the matter to the Tribunal. Relying upon these judgments, the learned counsel stressed on the point that the activities undertaken by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ngaged in providing a service connected with the making, preparation, display or exhibition of advertisement. That it includes all activities connected to such making, preparation, display or exhibition of advertisement. The appellant have been making signboards, flux boards, hoardings etc. as well as fixing and replacement of vinyl stickers and these activities fully fall under the definition of advertisement agency and therefore the demand raised is legal and proper. 5. We have heard the submissions made by both sides. 6. We would like to first address the issue on merits. The appellants have strongly argued that the activity undertaken by them did not involve any designing, visualizing or conceptualizing in fabricating and erecting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cation (supra) as well as Star Neon Singh (supra). The Tribunal had taken the same view in the case of Zodiac Advertisers (supra) which has now been remanded to the Tribunal by the Hon ble Supreme Court, pursuant to the reversal of the judgment by the Hon ble Kerala High Court. In such circumstances of the case, on facts, we have to say that there is no evidence before us to establish that the appellants are involved in any making or preparation of an advertisement such as designing, visualizing, conceptualizing etc. to fall under the definition of Advertisement Agency Service . The demand therefore raised alleging that appellants have rendered advertising agency service is therefore unsustainable. 8. The learned counsel argued on the gr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... when called for by the department. The demand has been confirmed basing upon the information gathered from the records maintained by the appellant. 9. From the above facts, we find that the demand raised invoking extended period of limitation alleging suppression of facts is not sustainable. It is also to be stated that the authority have imposed penalty both under section 76 and 78 which are not imposable simultaneously. We, therefore, find that the impugned demand for the extended period is unsustainable and requires to be set aside, which we hereby do. 10. In the result, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any. ( Operative portion of the order was pronounced in open court ) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
