9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 502X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... HEMAMBIKA R. PRIYA, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Sanjiv Aggarwal, Chartered Accountant for the Appellant Shri Rajeev Kapoor, Authorised Representative for the Department ORDER M/s Allen Career Institute [the appellant] has sought quashing of the order dated 15.03.2018 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) by which the appeal filed by the department has been allowed and the order dated 04.10.2013 passed by the Deputy Commissioner dropping the proceedings initiated against the appellant by the show cause notice dated 17.07.2012 for the period from October 2011 to March 2012 has been set aside. 2. The appellant is a coaching institute and in order to promote its activities it gives advertisements in print media for which purpose services of advertising agency services are availed by the appellant. These advertising agencies are registered with the service tax department under advertisement services . The advertising agency service is subject to service tax under section 65 (105) (e) of the Finance Act, 1994 [the Finance Act]. The advertising agency have shown service tax paid on the commission amount received from the print media separately in their invoices raised on the appellant and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Advertising Agency service (which they did) and as to how the impugned Cenvat Credit was admissible to the assessee on merits, which was proposed to be held inadmissible in the impugned Show Cause Notice. Also, I find that the similar view has already been taken in an identical case by the Ld. Adjudicating authority i.e. Additional Commissioner, Central Excise, Jaipur-1, vide their Order In Original no. 17/ST/JP-I/2013 Add. Commr. Central Excise, Jaipur. Following the ratio I am inclined to hold that the assessee has rightly availed the Cenvat Credit of service tax, charged by M/s QAC from them, in respect of the services rendered to them which were undisputedly in relation to advertisement and business promotion thereby falling within the purview of input service as defined under Rule2(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules. Thus, I hold that the demand of credit as raised vide impugned notice is not sustainable on merits and in such a situation, the question of imposing penalty and recovery of interest also does not arise. Accordingly, I pass the following order. 4. Feeling aggrieved, the department filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who by order dated 15.03.2018 set a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) should be set aside. 6. Shri Rajeev Kapoor, authorised representative appearing for the department has, however, supported the impugned order. 7. The submissions advanced by the learned chartered accountant for the appellant and the learned authorised representative have been considered. 8. A perusal of the order dated 29.07.2019 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in connection with three appeals covering the subsequent period from April 2012 to March 2015 in the matter of the appellant would show that the same Commissioner (Appeals) accepted the case of the appellant where identical arrangements had been made. In coming to this conclusion, the Commissioner (Appeals) placed reliance upon two decisions of the Tribunal in M/s Bansal Classes Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax [Service Tax Appeal No. 51467 of 2018 (SM) decided on 11.07.2018], and Career Point Info Systems Ltd. vs. C.C.E, Udaipur [Service Tax Appeal No. 51640 of 2018 (SM) decided on 24.01.2019]. The relevant portions of the said order dated 29.07.2019 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) are reproduced below: 5. I have carefully gone through the submissions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... judgments discussed above, I hold that the service tax paid by the Advertising Agency on such Commission received from Print Media vocers under input service as defined under Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and the Cenvat Credit is admissible to the appellant thus, the impugned order are not sustainable in law. 9. In Bansal Classes, on which reliance has been placed by the Commissioner (Appeals), the Tribunal held: 7 . It is not disputed that the appellant has got advertisements published in print media through various advertising agencies. In the bills issued by such advertising agencies, service tax has also been charged in addition to the amounts charged and paid to the print media for publishing such advertisement. The only dispute in the present case is whether such service tax paid to advertising agencies can be allowed as Cenvat Credit as input service in the hands of the appellant. 8. The ld. Counsel for the appellant has drawn attention to the copies of a few invoices which are available on record. He has also emphasized the relevant part of the agreement entered into by the appellant with advertising agencies. Perusal of such agreement indicates that the activitie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tre i.e. to provide the output service of CTCS. Thus, the payment made by the appellant for the purpose definitely becomes an input for him for providing a Commercial Coaching and Training Service. I draw my support from the decision of Tribunal Mumbai in the case of Zapak Digital Entertainment Ltd. Vs. C.S.T., Mumbai II reported as 2017 (49) S.T.R. 455 (Tri Mumbai) as has also been relied upon by the Ld. Counsel for the appellant, wherein it has been held that since the invoices are clearly showing that agency is merely acting as a conduit for transfer of money from assessee to the print media(broadcaster in the said case), the cenvat credit on the payment made to the advertisement agency cannot be denied to the service recipient thereof. The another decision of Tribunal Chennai in Jyothy Laboratories Ltd. Vs. C.C.E., Puducherry reported as 217 (52) S.T.R. 511 (Tri. Chennai) makes it clear that the issue is no more res integra and has been decided by various coordinate benches. I respectfully agree by the said decisions. The finding of the Commissioner Appeals for holding that impugned services are Business Auxiliary Service which are not taxable hence not eligible for taking audi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
