Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2018 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 834 - AT - Service TaxSSI Exemption - use of brand name of others - earning commission for promotion by way of marketing and selling of branded goods under the brand name/trade name viz., BATA on behalf of their principals M/s Bata India Ltd. - case of appellant is that the said commission is less than threshold limit under the Notification No. 06/2005-ST and 33/2012 it is not taxable. Held that:- Services rendered by the appellant is to Bata India Limited and get paid for such services; appellant is not into rendering of any branded services to customers, who purchase only branded footwear from the outlet. In this situation, the argument of the Revenue that services rendered by the appellant being in the Bata showroom are taxable services provided by a person under a brand name or trade name it cannot be held so. Similar issue decided in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh Vs. A.S. Financial [2014 (7) TMI 746 - CESTAT NEW DELHI], where it was held that respondent cannot be treated using the brand name of ICICI Bank Ltd. - Another case law, which is similar to the issue involved, is Bakliwal Brothers Vs. CCE, Raipur [2017 (9) TMI 84 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] wherein, the appellant was having a shop and activity of promoting sale of “Koutons” brand of readymade garments. The bench again held that such activity is not taxable, benefit of exemption for small scale service providers is available. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|