9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 141X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... NAIR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND MR. RAJU, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Jigar Shah & Amber Kumrawat (Advocate) for the Appellant Shri Kalpesh P. Shah, (Superintendent) Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER The brief facts of the case are that during the course of investigation against M/s BCCI-IPL and franchisees/ service providers in respect of IPL series by the Service Tax - Commissionerate (Mumbai), it was revealed that the appellant had made a payment of Rs. 1,63,15,200/- to BCCI-IPL for sponsorship service in the month of September 2008. The appellant made further payments of same amount for the year 2008-09 and 2009-10. Against the said payment as being pointed out by BCCI-IPL, as an official partner of the league for the duration of the rights period i.e. from 07.05.2008 to 31.12.2012 according to which the BCCI-IPL has been granting Vodafone Essar the exclusive rights to use the rights during the rights period in relation to the advertisement and promotion of the brand Vodafone along, within the product category in India and the right to any Affiliates and or sub-licensees, whether in India or outside India to use right strictly in accordance with the terms of the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... "(zzzn) to any person, by anu other person receiving sponsorship, in relation to such sponsorship, in any manner;" From the clause related to sponsorship service before and after the amendment makes it clear that prior to 01.07.2010, the receipt of sponsorship in relation to the sports event was not taxable, however the same became taxable after 01.07.2010. In the present case, the sponsorship received from BCCI-IPL is clearly in respect of cricket sports events which conducts cricket matches of T-20, therefore, the sponsorship is clearly related to the sports events which was not included under the sponsorship service as per sub clause (zzzn) prevailing prior to 01.07.2010, therefore, the same is not taxable. This issue is no longer res-integra as absolutely identical activity and in respect of identically placed company M/s Hero Honda Motors Limited who entered into agreement with M/s BCCI for the same sponsorship in relation to IPL matches, the Tribunal held as under: "2. These appeals challenge distinct adjudication orders passed against the appellant assessees herein levying service tax in relation to sponsorship of IPL League matches, in IPL1, IPL-2 and IPL-3 during the pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f any sports event, being clearly in the nature of obtaining sponsorship rights for being designated as the exclusive Title Sponsor of the League by the BCCI IPL, which is not a sports event but a society registered under The Tamil Nadu Societies Act, 1975. 7. We confess our inability to comprehend the contrived reasoning recorded by the adjudicating authority It is not the assessees case that they were sponsoring BCCI/IPL. It is their contention as revealed from the show cause notices issued, the responses thereto, and the (illustrative) agreement dated 13.02 2008 (entered between the appellant in Appeal No. ST/627-629 of 2011 and the BCCI) that sponsorships are in relation to T-20 Cricket League matches to be held under the auspices of BCCI The sponsorship agreement confers contain participative and associative rights to the assessees in relation to the IPL events, which assessees assume would contribute to augmentation of their business by way of advertisement of their presence in the fields of their core endeavour and business. Inasmuch the analysis by the adjudicating authority proceeds on the assumption that BCCI/IPL is not a sports event but a society registered under The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y recorded in the adjudication order and reiterated in oral argument before us is that since the assessees sponsorship is of a league match it is not sponsorship of a sports event. 14. The adjudicating authority (though a different incumbent of the authority) passed an order which is the subject matter of Service Tax Appeal No. 1418 of 2011. The core reason recorded for disallowing the claim of the appellant herein is that while T-20 matches played under the banner of IPL are clearly sports events, BCCI/ IPL cannot be imagined to be a sporting event The authority records that from the agreement dated 18.04.2008 (the relevant sponsorship agreement), the assessee was appointed the official partner as set out in clause 2 thereof and franchisee rights accrue to the assessee for a consideration (sponsorship fee) paid to the BCCV IPL: and the terms and conditions in the sponsorship agreement clearly disclose that the assessee had made the payment to the BCCI IPL, not for a T-20 tournament of any cricket match but to BCCI IPL which itself is not a game. 15. The above analysis of the adjudication authority, creative as it goes, defies comprehension. On a true and fair analysis of the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
