Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2022 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (9) TMI 678 - AT - Service TaxLevy of service tax - service or not - advertising agency service or not - activity of wide format printing - supply of advertising material to clients based on the designs provided by the clients - printing activity - HELD THAT:- It is not in dispute that in the present case the customers provide the ‘ready to print’ advertising content to the respondent and the respondent merely prints the advertisement content on the PVC material procured by the respondent from the open market. The respondent has no role at all in the conceptualization or in the making or creation of design. In fact, the respondent has no authority at all to even make any changes in the advertisement content provided by the customers and the respondent merely prints that on the PVC material procured from the market. This activity would not fall within the scope of the activity contemplated under section 65(3) of the Finance Act. In WILLIAM LEA (INDIA) P. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAI-IV [2019 (2) TMI 1310 - CESTAT CHENNAI], a division bench of the Tribunal held that where the basic marketing or promotional material as per the approved design layout has been provided by the Reader’s Digest to the appellant therein for getting them printed, and the appellant was only required to procure material on which it was to be printed, it would not mean that the service provided by the appellant would fall within the definition of ‘advertisement agency’. Levy of service tax on printing activity - HELD THAT:- The Commissioner was justified in holding that it would not be subjected to levy of service tax. In the first instance the activity of printing of advertisement content on PVC material which results into printed PVC flex or PVC board would amount to manufacture and, therefore, would not be leviable to service tax. Secondly, the appellant has not challenged the findings of the adjudicating authority on this aspect - or the post 01.07.2012 period, the Commissioner has held that the activity undertaken by the respondent being merely transfer of title on goods by sale and subjected to Sales Tax/VAT on the full value, would be excluded from the scope of service tax under section 65B (44)(a)(1) of the Finance Act. The sale of the product has not been disputed and even otherwise no grounds have been raised in the present appeal to assail this part of the order of the Commissioner. There is also force in the submission of learned counsel for the respondent that even the show cause notice does not indicate why service tax would be leviable for the period post 01.07.2012. Appeal dismissed.
|