Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2019 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (10) TMI 535 - AT - Service TaxEvasion of Service tax - non-payment of service tax on “subscription fees” collected from Multi System Operators and Cable Operators - demand alongwith interest and penalty - extended period of limitation - noticee’s statutory liability to pay service tax on broadcasting service provided by them - failure to declare true and correct details in ST-3 returns - misdeclaration and suppression of material facts or not? Whether in respect of entire gamut of services received by the service recipients the service provider are appellants or in some case the appellants are the agent of service providers (i.e. MSMPL and DCI)? - HELD THAT:- For levy of service tax identification of service provider and service recipient is of prime importance before the liability to pay service tax can be assigned. In this case while the revenue contends that Appellant are the service provider whereas appellant contend that MSMPL and DCI are the service provider who have also discharged the service tax liability in respect of the services provided under the category of Broadcasting Services. Appellants have contended that they are acting as agents of the service provider namely MSMPL and DCI for various purposes in relation to provisioning of services under the category of Broadcasting Services to MSOs/ COs. For rendering such service which include the collection of subscription charge they receive commission from MSMPL and DCI on which they discharge Service Tax under the category of “Business Auxiliary Services”. Revenue also do not dispute that fact that appellants were discharging service tax on the commission received by them under the category of Business Auxiliary Service. The appellant is joint venture of MSMPL and Discovery Communications India (DCI). Appellants have entered into agreement with MSO’s/ CO’s to provide the channels being distributed by MSMPL, DCI, TV Today Network etc. The channels being offered by the appellant are either in ala carte form or as bouquet of channel to the subscribers. In respect of the channels subscribed by the MSO/ CO, they are paying the subscription fee in respect of all the channels subscribed by them. The finding recorded by the Commissioner has been recorded ignoring the fact that Appellants were paying service tax on the Commission received by them from their principals under the category of Business Auxiliary Services. The findings recorded by the Commissioner in this respect needs to be set aside and matter remanded back to him, to pass consider all the documents and arguments advanced by the appellants in this respect. Broadcasting Service - service tax in respect of the subscription charges collected in respect of the channels distributed by the TV Today Network paid - case of Revenue is that the demand made needs to be reconsidered specifically by referring to the business models adopted by the Appellants for extending the services to service recipients i.e. MSO’s/ CO’s - HELD THAT:- In absence of any finding recorded in this regards Commissioner has proceeded to confirm the demand by comparing two un-comparables i.e. oranges with apples. Service tax being contract/ transaction based levy the terms of contracts between the parties to the contract need to be examined and finding recorded before any demand can be made. In our view the matter needs to be remanded back to adjudicating authority for recording finding on this account also. Appeal allowed by way of remand.
|