2006 (1) TMI 2 - AT - Service Tax

Scope of advertising services - making sign boards and installation the same at specified places for display

Summary

Issues:
- Determination of whether the appellants fall under the purview of service tax as an advertising agency.
- Interpretation of the definition of "advertising service" under Section 65(90)(e).
- Assessment of the activities of the appellants in relation to the manufacture, installation, and display of signages.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed challenging the Commissioner (Appeals) order, which concluded that the appellants are subject to service tax as an advertising agency. The appellants, a partnership firm engaged in manufacturing and selling hoardings, sign boards, and signages, were awarded a tender by Uttaranchal Tourism Department to manufacture and affix signages at specified places. The appellants' contention was that they were not an advertising agency but involved in manufacturing and sales.

2. The Department's Authorized Representative argued that the appellants' activities fell within the scope of 'Advertising Agency and Advertising Services' as they involved the preparation and installation of signages. Reference was made to Section 65(90)(e) which defines "advertising service" as a taxable service provided by an advertising agency to a client in relation to advertisements.

3. Despite notice, no representation was made by the appellants, and no request for adjournment was received. The Tribunal proceeded to hear the arguments of the Authorized Representative and reviewed the records.

4. Upon examination, the Tribunal found that the appellants not only engaged in manufacturing and selling signages but also provided services such as installation and display of advertisements. These activities were deemed to fall under the definition of "advertising agency" as per Section 65(90)(e). Therefore, the Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' decision that the appellants' actions constituted a taxable service within the realm of advertising agency services.

5. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming that the appellants' activities were subject to service tax as they were considered to be providing advertising agency services. The judgment was dictated and pronounced in open court, bringing the matter to a close.