9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 683X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made through 4 Show-cause notices in the form of Statement of demand raised subsequent to the original Show-cause notice dated 10.10.2008 is assailed in this appeal. 2. Facts of the case, in a nutshell, goes to say that appellant is a Non-Profit making Organization got itself incorporated as a limited Company under the Companies Act, 1956. Owners of copy rights in musical works are its members who took member-ship for the purpose of assignment of their copy rights in respect of musical and literary works to the Appellant in terms of Section 18 of the Copyright Act, 1957 and pursuant to such assignment Appellant, as owner of copy right under assignment, licences the same to various organizations for use in radio stations, online music strea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n on 16.03.2017 dropping the demand made through the primary Show-cause notice dated 10.10.2008, subsequent demand made through Show-cause in the form of statement of demand would not survive even for the period post negative list as the alleged nature of service rendered by the appellant remained unchanged. He further submitted that appellant had not provided any service to its members but provided services of licencing the copyrights in musical works to its members who had only paid subscription fee of meager amount and licensing of copyright in musical work being exempted from the purview of 'Intellectual Property Right Services' both for the period from 1.04.2010 to 30.06.2012 and post negative list period of dispute from 01.07.2012 to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reasoning and rationality of the order passed by the Commissioner and placed his reliance on the decision of Banglore Tribunal in the case of ICICI Econet Internet Technology Fund Vs. Commissioner of Central Tax reported in [2021] 51 GSTL 36 (Tri. Bang.) to justify that principle of mutuality would not be applicable in case of a Trust representing the fund since they are engaged in Commercial activities and therefore, he sought no interference by the Tribunal in the order passed by the Commissioner. 6. We have gone through the case record, written note of submission and relied upon judgments. At the outset we want to place it on record that the Show-cause cum demand notice lacks clarity about the recipient of the service and the nature of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s a company and not a Society registered under Society Registration Act but it collects monthly subscription fee from its members. Apart from this amount no other consideration flows from the members/ copyright owners to the appellant and there is no denial of the fact that entire collection from the membership had never exceeded the threshold prescribed for registration of a Company under Service Tax. Further what is defined as a facility extended by the appellant is found to be a statuary requirement under Section 33 of the Copyright Act, 1957 that requires that copyright transactions are to be handled only through a Society registered under the Act. Be that as it may, the entire transaction with the appellant as assigner/ conditional own ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
