Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2018 (5) TMI 221

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... agent for marketing and sales promotion of products of the company M/s United Spirits Limited. For the above activity, appellant entered into an agency agreement with M/s United Spirits Limited wherein it has been inter-alia agreed that :- (a) assessee will assist in procuring orders from the potential/existing customers of the IMFL products manufactured and marketed by the company (hereafter "the company's products"). The company will supply products directly in accordance with the purchase of such identified customers. (b) assessee shall assist the company in conducting promotional activities including hoarding, road shows, print and electronic media, wall painting of promotional advertisements etc. as permissible under the applicab .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t the advertisements were inputs for the output service of promoting/marketing the products of the company. The reason for the disallowance is that the advertisement undertaken were not for sales promotion of liquor but for other products of the same brand. Hence, the Adjudicating Authority took the view that service tax paid on such advertisement services cannot be considered as input services for the output service of promoting the liquor produced by United Spirits Limited. Appellant challenges this order. 4. In this connection, we heard Shri A.K. Batra, learned CA and Ms. Vibha Narang, learned Advocate on behalf of the appellant as well as Shri Sanjay Jain and Shri Amresh Jain, learned DR for the Revenue. 5. Shri A.K. Batra, explained .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... bai) ; (c) HCL Technologies Ltd. vs. CCE, Noida - 2015 (8) TMI 595 - CESTAT NEW DELHI and (d) CCE, Noida vs. HCL Technologies Ltd. - 2016 (42) S.T.R. 48 (Tri. - Del.). 6. The learned DR justified the order. He argued that advertisement services cannot be considered as input services since such advertisement has no nexus with the output service rendered by the appellant for United Spirits Limited. The consideration received by the appellant is on the basis of cases of liquor promoted and marketed by it. He specifically has drawn our attention to the findings of the Adjudicating Authority in the impugned order in para 48. He also argued that the appellant was guilty of suppression of facts and, hence, the Revenue was within its right .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , such advertisement services will qualify as input services under Rule 2 (l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. After perusal of the definition of input service in Rule 2 (l) during the period relevant to the dispute, we are not convinced. The input service in the form of advertisement cannot be considered as used for providing the output taxable service of promotion or marketing for the simple reason that the output service is for promoting the IMFL produced by M/s United Spirits Limited, but the advertisement expenditure was incurred for advertisement of other products, such as, soda and not liquor products. It is easily seen that the advertisement of soda etc. cannot be considered as an advertisement of the alcoholic beverages of the sam .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... half of the appellant that there is no suppression on the part of the appellant in as much as the details of availment of Cenvat credit have been declared in the monthly ST- 3 returns. Upon perusal of the impugned order, we note that this aspect has been discussed in detail in para 39. The advertisement for sale promotion of liquor is not legally permitted in India and, hence, the advertisements undertaken by the appellant, depicted other surrogate products, such as, mineral water. Such advertisements are consciously made without showing liquor, circumventing the ban on advertisement for the IMFL products, but the appellant have asserted that such advertisements were for promoting the sale of IMFL by the company. This amounts to not only su .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates