9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 152X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he subsidy against the expenses incurred for conducting Cricket Matches, therefore, by any stretch of imagination it cannot be said that the respondent has provided any taxable service to BCCI. This issue has already been considered by this tribunal in the case of VIDARBH CRICKET ASSOCIATION [ 2014 (1) TMI 204 - CESTAT MUMBAI (LB) ] where it is settled that in the case of the Cricket Association, similarly, placed as the appellant the subsidy received from BCCI was held to be non-taxable. The demand in the present case in the show cause notice was rightly dropped by the adjudicating authority - there are no infirmity in the impugned order - appeal of Revenue dismissed. - MR. RAMESH NAIR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND MR. RAJU, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri. Ghanasyam Soni, Joint Commissioner (AR) for the Appellant Shri S S Gupta, Chartered Accountant for the Respondent ORDER The brief facts of the case are that M/s. Saurashtra Cricket Association, Rajkot, are engaged in conducting Cricket Matches of International level, National Level and State level at different places in Rajkot Region. The respondent is an Association registered under the Society Registration Act, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he revenue on the amount receive by the respondent from the BCCI as subsidy. The department has construed the said receipt as service charges received from BCCI against the services of event management. From the facts, it is clear that the respondent have received the subsidy against the expenses incurred for conducting Cricket Matches, therefore, by any stretch of imagination it cannot be said that the respondent has provided any taxable service to BCCI. This issue has already been considered by this tribunal in the case of VIDARBH CRICKET ASSOCIATION (Supra) wherein the Tribunal has passed the following order 5.5 The next issue for consideration is leviability of service tax on the amounts received from BCCI by the appellant by way of subsidies. Revenue's contention is that these amounts have been paid to the appellant for infrastructural support rendered by the appellant to BCCI. 5.5.1 . The following subsidies have been given by BCCI - 1) TV Rights subsidy; 2) BCCI tournament receipts; 3) Infrastructure subsidy; 4) BCCI IPL subsidy; 5) Players expenses reimbursement; 6) lease fees for Corporate Box; and 7) subsidy granted by BCCI. The nature of these ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing policies, infrastructural support services and other transaction processing. Explanation.-For the purposes of this clause, the expression infrastructural support services includes providing office along with office utilities, lounge, reception with competent personnel to handle messages, secretarial services, internet and telecom facilities, pantry and security. From the above definition, it is evident that the support services should be provided in relation to business or commerce. The question is whether conducting cricket tournaments and telecasting the same would constitute business or commerce. 5.5.4 . A similar came up for consideration before the hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting vs. Cricket Association of Bengal (supra) and it was held as follows:- .An organization such as BCCI or CAB in the present case which are indisputably devoted to the promotion of the game of cricket, cannot be placed in the same scale as the business organizations whose only intention is to make as large a profit as can be made by telecasting the game. Whereas it can be said that there is har ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... udgment applies squarely to the facts of the case before us. It thus clearly emerges that, the service, if at all any, rendered by the appellant is not in relation to any business or commerce and therefore, there is no service tax liability on the said activity under section 65 (104c) read with 65(105)(zzzq) of the Finance Act, 1994. 5.5.5 . From the records, it is seen that the very same activity was examined by the Commissioner of Service Tax at Ahmedabad in the case of Gujarat Cricket Association and Saurashtra Cricket Association and by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune, in the case of Maharashtra Cricket Association as to their taxability under event management service' and the demands were dropped vide orders dated 24-9-07, 27-3-09 and 28-7-2006 respectively. 5.5.6 In the light of the above decisions, we hold that the appellant is not liable to service tax under the category of BSS and the service tax demands made in this regard in the impugned orders are unsustainable in law and accordingly are set aside. 5.6 The next issue for consideration is whether extended time limit could have been invoked to confirm the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of bona fide belief lacks conviction and is not convincing. It appears to be an argument of convenience rather than anything else. On the other hand, it is clear from the records that the appellant did not obtain service tax registration and did not comply with the statutory procedures and requirements of service tax law. Therefore, the inevitable conclusion that emerges is that the appellant has suppressed the facts of their activities from the Department with an intent to evade service tax. The Ld. Adjudicating authority has also dealt with this issue in detail in paragraphs 15.1 to 15.4 of the impugned order and has based his conclusions relying on the decisions of the Tribunal and the Supreme Court. Accordingly we hold that the extended period of time has been correctly invoked in the present case to confirm the service tax demand. 5.7.1 . The hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Neminath Fabrics [2010 (256) ELT 369 (Guj.)] affirmed in [2013 (287) ELT 149 (Guj.)] held as follows:- 16. The term from which the period of one year or five years has to be computed is the relevant date which has been defined in sub-section (3)(ii) of section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under section 78, except in the case of renting of immovable property (where the levy itself is under challenge before the Supreme Court), we find no reason to interfere with the same in view of our finding in para 5.6 above that the appellant had suppressed the facts from the department with an intent to evade tax. 6. To sum up, we hold that,- a) the confirmation of service tax demands under the taxable service category of Mandap Keeper Service, Club and Association service, Renting of Immovable property service and Sale of space for advertisement service is sustainable in law. In the case of Club Association service, the tax demand has to be recomputed excluding the bar sales subject to the appellant producing satisfactory evidence in this regard. b) the appellant is liable to pay interest on the above service tax demands in accordance with law. c) the appellant is liable to penalty under Sections 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. d) the appellant is also liable to penalty under Section 78 of the said Finance Act except in the case of Renting of Immovable property service. e) the demand of service tax under the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
