TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 461X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any return at Chennai. Prima facie, we also find that the demand of tax on print media cost is not sustainable. Thus, there is a dispute in quantification of the demand. Partial stay granted. - ST/40683/2013 - Misc. Order No.41614/2014 - Dated:- 23-9-2014 - Shri P.K. Das and Shri R. Periasami, JJ. For the Appellant : Shri V.S. Manoj, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri M. Rammohan Rao, DC (AR) ORDER Per P.K. Das The applicant is engaged in producing television programmes and supervision of the production activities. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of service tax of ₹ 2,26,78,345/- along with interest and penalty under the category of Programme Producer Service and Advertising Agency S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y returns at Chennai. The deposit made by the applicant, as claimed by them, is in the jurisdiction of the Mumbai Commissionerate. The Mumbai Commissionerate had not given any letter that this amount was paid in the context of the Chennai Branch. (b) There is no dispute that the applicant collected the service tax from the customer which was not deposited at Chennai and no return was filed. (c) There is no dispute regarding the demand on programme producer service. (d) They have not filed any return and the payment of tax at Chennai was not substantiated with material evidence. (e) The adjudicating authority had given a detailed finding in the adjudication order that the applicant had not produced any document to substantiate t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... chargeable to service tax is the total amount of the bill or only the portion of the total amount of the bill, the basic documents viz. the invoices raised to their customers and the invoices raised by the print media and the one-to-one correlation between the advertisement charges received from the customers for print media and the payment made to the print media needs to be verified, whereas no such document to this extent was submitted by the assessee vide their letter dated 7.8.2012 to prove their claim. The assessee did not furnish invoice-wise break-up or copy of invoice/ledger etc. when the break up relating to the income from Chennai operations were called for by the investigating officers and the same have not been produced even n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It is also seen that the applicant had not filed any ST-3 returns and therefore there is no scope of the Revenue to verify the payment. We are not clear as to how the applicant paid this amount as claimed by them but they have not filed any return at Chennai. Prima facie, we also find that the demand of tax on print media cost is not sustainable. Thus, there is a dispute in quantification of the demand. After considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, we direct the applicant to predeposit ₹ 30,00,000/- (Rupees thirty lakhs only) within a period of eight weeks and report compliance on 26.11.2014. Upon such deposit, predeposit of the balance dues stands waived and recovery thereof stayed during the pendency of the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
