Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2017 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 1106 - AT - Service TaxBusiness auxiliary service - whether the amounts received from Coca Cola under the heads “Sales Target Incentive” and “Advertisement and Publicity expenses” are covered under business auxiliary service? - The SCN alleges that the appellant has received the aforesaid amount from the brand owners to promote and market the brands of the brand owners - Held that: - BAS is an omnibus service covering within its fold various types of services. It has not been indicated either in the Show Cause Notice or Order-in-Original under which sub clause the appellant’s service is being charged to service tax. By process of elimination, we conclude that it is likely to be under “Promotion or marketing or sale of goods produced or service provided by the client”; we note that no investigation has been undertaken by Revenue into the reasons for which appellants have received the payments. Hence, it is not very clear why the appellant has received the said amounts from M/s Coca cola When we look at the clause (i) the definition of the BAS, which covers promotion or marketing or sale of goods produced or service provided, we fail to see how the promotion of the brand name can be brought under the above clause. A new service stands introduced with effect from 1.07.2010, which covered specifically “Brand Promotion Service” - Even if a view is taken that the service rendered by the appellant is covered under the new service w.e.f. 01.07.2010, the same cannot be charged to service tax under BAS for the earlier period - this is established by the Tribunal in the case of Sourav Ganguly vs. Union of India [2016 (7) TMI 237 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT]. There is no justification for the demand of service tax raised under BAS for the period 2006-07 to 2009-2010 - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|