TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 929X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DABAD] , wherein the Tribunal observed that It is seen that no evidence has been placed from record to establish that the appellant were providing Advertising Agency Services. The role of appellant was limited to being an intermediary in the sale of space/ time for media agency on commission basis. In terms of Notification No.1/96-ST, the assessee is not liable to be included the amount paid for space and time in getting the advertisement published in print media. Therefore, the said amount is not includible in the value of taxable service provided by the assessee. Further, on discount received by the appellant, no service tax is payable as the same has not been received in consideration of providing the taxable service by the appellant. It was further found that the advertisers themselves have paid service tax on behalf of the appellant, therefore, if the same is demanded from the assessee, it would be double taxation on the service - As in the case in hand, the service tax has been paid by the advertisers on behalf of the appellant, therefore, same is treated as paid by the appellant. Accordingly, no demand is sustainable against the appellant. On the services provid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he advertisement for print media and paying service tax on 15% of the total amount of commission received by them. 5. The said issue has been decided by this Tribunal in the case of Drishty Communication Private Limited Vs. C.C.E. S.T.-Rajkot vide Final Order No.A/10016/2023 dated 05.01.2023, wherein the Tribunal observed as under:- 4. We have considered rival submissions. We find that in the instant case M/s. Surya Publicity was providing Advertising Services to its client. M/s. Surya Publicity was not discharged any service tax liability as the same was liable for the levy of Service Tax. M/s. Surya Publicity was purchasing time and space in the newspaper / media companies through the appellant. The amount paid by M/s. Surya Publicity to the appellant for purchase of time M/s. Surya Publicity to the appellant for purchase of time and space was sought to be tax by revenue under the category of Advertising Service. It is seen that no evidence has been placed from record to establish that the appellant were providing Advertising Agency Services. The role of appellant was limited to being an intermediary in the sale of space/ time for media agency on commission basis. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of enhancement of penalty on M/s. H.K. Associates and imposition of penalties on other three parties as prayed for in the other appeals by the department does not arise. The aforesaid decision of Tribunal has been upheld by Hon ble Apex Court as reported in 2010 (19) STR J111 (S.C). In view of aforementioned CBEC clarification and the decision of tribunal in similar circumstances the demand cannot be upheld, and is therefore set aside. The appeal is consequently allowed. 6. We further take note of the fact that in terms of Notification No.1/96-ST, the assessee is not liable to be included the amount paid for space and time in getting the advertisement published in print media. Therefore, the said amount is not includible in the value of taxable service provided by the assessee. 7. Further, on discount received by the appellant, no service tax is payable as the same has not been received in consideration of providing the taxable service by the appellant. It was further found that the advertisers themselves have paid service tax on behalf of the appellant, therefore, if the same is demanded from the assessee, it would be double taxation on the service and the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tainable against the appellant . 8. We further take note of the fact that appellant has provided certain service to the Government agencies and claim that the same is exempt from service tax, we find that the said service has not been exempted from payment of service tax as observed by this Tribunal in the case of Prithvi Associates v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai [2006 (1) S.T.R. 32 (Tri.-Mumbai)], wherein the Tribunal has observed as under :- 6 . Definition of advertisement and advertising agency as appearing in Sections 65(2) and 65(3) of the Finance Act, 1994 is to the following effect :- Advertisement includes any notice, circular, label, wrapper, document, hoarding or any other audio or visual representation made by means of light, sound, smoke or gas; Advertising agency means any commercial concern engaged in providing any service connected with the making, preparation, display or exhibition of advertisement and includes an advertising consultant; As is clear from the above, advertisement includes any hoarding and advertising agency means any commercial concern engaged in providing any service connected with the display of adverti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
