Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Bhagwati Enterprises Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Jalandhar

2015 (9) TMI 368 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Admission of additional evidence - Classification of service - Advertising agency service or Renting of immovable property - appellants have contended that they were not providing any advertising agency service and were in fact renting space from Railways which they used to further give on rent - Held that:- Commissioner (Appeals) referred to Rule 5 of the Central Excise (Appeals) Rules, 2001 and held that additional evidence can be considered only when the adjudicating authority has refused to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rom the Railways and were not providing any advertising agency service. - in the interest of justice additional evidence in support of the appellants' aforesaid contention should be admitted - matter remanded back - Decided in favor of assessee. - Service Tax Appeal No. 269 of 2009 - Final Order No. ST/A/51390/2015-CU(DB) - Dated:- 9-4-2015 - G Raghuram, President And R K Singh, Member (T),JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Sudhir Malhotra, Adv. For the Respondent : Shri Mani Ram Sharma, DR ORDER Per: .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

contended that they were not providing any advertising agency service and were in fact renting space from Railways which they used to further give on rent. They were not providing any design or material etc. and therefore were not covered under the advertising agency service. They stated that the service rendered by them would be covered under renting of immovable property service which were not taxable during the period 2006-07. 3. We have considered the contentions of the appellants. In Sectio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

or exhibition of advertisement. It is seen that in the case of CCE vs. Azad Publication 2004 (167) ELT 59 (Tri. Del.) it was held that permitting display of advertisement on its site and raising bill for realising rental charges was not covered under advertising agency service. Similarly, in the case of CCE vs. The Incoda 2004 (174) ELT 65 (Tri. Kol), it was held that respondent hired space in Metro Railway coaches and inter-alia provided space to its client for advertising and such activity wa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ce tax that they were getting space from Railways and let out the said space to different clients for displaying their advertisement for specific period for which they were getting rent from their customers and letting of space does not fall under the category of Advertising Agency services and accordingly not chargeable to service tax whereas during the investigation stage or adjudication stage, the appellant has not submitted these facts, despite being asked for twice. Thus it is observed that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version