9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 1289X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Branch at the strength of which credit was taken by the Respondent. This appears to be genuine mistake and is not serious breach of the Cenvat Credit Rules. The Adjudicating authority has correctly held that the service tax was not required to be paid by the Respondent on the amount paid by them to the print media and they have rightly paid the service tax on the discount and commission allowed by the print media during the material period. Regarding broadcasting advertisements by the Respondent, it is on record that the Respondent has arranged broadcasting advertisements and submitted some bills and invoices issued by the electronic media and corresponding debit notes and invoices issued by them to their clients - the Respondent cannot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... heir clients to realize the amounts charged to them by the electronic media. It was also noticed that the Respondent availed Cenvat Credit of service tax to the extent of ₹ 14,620/- along with Education Cess of ₹ 301/- and Higher Education Cess of ₹ 10/- on the basis of documents containing their office address at Cuttack, which was found to be irregular. Accordingly, show-cause notice was issued to the Respondent asking them to show-cause as to why the amount of service tax and cess amounting to ₹ 1,82,55,094/- and ₹ 3,61,395/- should not be recovered from them under the provisions of Section 73 (1) of the Finance Act, 1994 (for short the Act). Appropriate interest was also asked to be paid by the Respondent u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity has observed that the Respondent-Assessee paid the service tax from August, 2006 on the commission received for providing advertisements service. It was held by the ld.Adjudicating Authority that the service tax payable on the amount received and not the amount billed, but from the Order-in-Original, it appears that in case of print media, the service tax was paid on the gross billed amount of 2006-2007. The ld.Adjudicating Authority has held that the Respondent-Assessee adopted mercantile system of accounting, but re-conciliation of the amount billed and actual amount received by the Assessee was not made in Order-in-Original. Therefore, in absence of such re-conciliation of the statement of account of the Assessee, it was not clear as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rged by the media for displaying or broadcasting , the advertisement has no nexus with the service being provided by the Respondent ; that this is an amount on which demand was raised and the same has been held to be constituted the value of taxable service. Accordingly, no reconciliation as suggested in the appeal filed by the Department is unwarranted. Regarding nonimposition of penalty in respect of credit amounting to ₹ 10,649/- is concerned, the Respondent took the credit of the said amount , which were issued to their Cuttack Branch and hence, they are liable to penalty under Rule 15(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. As the amount involved was very insignificant, no penalty was imposed under Rule 15 (4) of the Rules. 5. We ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... attract service tax. The amount paid by the Respondent to the print media related to sale space advertisement in the print media. The said amount which was reimbursed by the respondent, was not chargeable to service tax in terms of aforesaid clarification issued by the Board. In the said letter, it was also clarified that the commission earned by way of facilitating sale of space in print media is leviable to service tax. The relevant portion of the said letter is reproduced below : In view of the fact that :- (i) the advertising agency is not buying space for advertisement in print media for its own use but only acts as an intermediary facilitating sale of media for advertisement ; (ii) space in print media is used by the cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... time for advertisement to the electronic media. The sale of advertising space and time is a separate taxable service, which came to be service net on 01.05.2006. The person providing the said service was liable to pay service tax on the taxable value of such service. The Respondent acts as an intermediary between the clients and electronic media and therefore, on the basis of analogy adopted in TRU letter F.No.332/4/2008-TRU dated 05.05.2008, the Respondent cannot be made liable to pay service tax again on the amount charged for sale of time and space in electronic media, which was held to be separate tax altogether. However, the amount received by the Respondent for providing the service as an intermediary was liable to service tax. The Ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
