9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 1710X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 25/2012-ST dated 20/06/2012 - HELD THAT:- The Original Authority has taken Central Excise Customs Notification into consideration to decide the matter related to service tax and held that since UNICEF is not mentioned in Notification No.16/2002-ST dated 02/08/2002 exemption for services provided to UNICEF is not covered by said service tax Notification - it is noted that this Tribunal has already ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... umar learned advocate on behalf of the appellant and Shri Sandeep Kumar Singh learned A.R. on behalf of Revenue, we note that the appellants were providing certain services to UNICEF and they were not paying service tax in respect of said services in view of the their understanding that services provided to UNICEF are covered by exemption Notification No.16/2002-ST dated 02/08/2002 and Notificatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ribunal's decision in the case of Ballset Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi reported at 2018 (10) G.S.T.L. 372 (Tri.-Del.) wherein it has been observed in Para-5 of the said decision of this Tribunal that UNICEF is covered by exemption Notification No.16/2002-ST. Further learned counsel for the appellant also relied on this Tribunal's decision in the case of AC Nielson ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ption for services provided to UNICEF is not covered by said service tax Notification. We note that this Tribunal has already held in the above stated case of Ballset Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. that UNICEF is covered by said Notification No.16/2002-ST by following said decision of this Tribunal, we hold that the appellants were entitled for exemption under Notification No.16/2002-ST dated 02/08/2002 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
