9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 576X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x under Business Auxiliary Service (BAS) on the commission which the appellant received from BSNL for sale of recharge coupons and Sim cards. The primary adjudicating authority held that the appellant received the commission for marketing and distribution of BSNL telecom service in addition to sale of BSNL products and services including all types of post-paid and pre-paid services. 2. The Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned order held that purchase and sale of Sim cards/recharge coupons was not covered under BAS and set aside the primary adjudication order 3. The Revenue has contended that the activity of the appellant is covered under the definition of BAS given in Section 65 (19) of the Finance Act, 1994 and that as per the agreem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in this case fully covers the issue in respondent's favour. The said judgement of CESTAT refers to the judgement of Supreme Court in the case of Idea Mobile Communications Ltd Paragraphs 2,4,5,6 and 7 of the said CESTAT order are reproduced below for easy reference:- "2. The present appeal is filed against the judgment and order dated 4-9-2008 [2010 (19) S.T.R. 18 (Ker.)] passed by the Kerala High Court whereby and whereunder, the High Court allowed the appeal filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Cochin. 3. The issue which arises for our consideration in this appeal is whether the value of SIM cards sold by the appellant herein to their mobile subscribers is to be included in taxable service under Section 65(105)zz ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ging the levy of service tax on the sale price of SIM cards and also challenging the levy of sales tax on the amounts recovered by the appellant by way of activation charges from its customers which was dismissed vide order dated 15-2-2002. 6. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant filed Civil Appeal No. 2408 of 2002 before this Court. Based on the judgment of the High Court dated 15-2-2002, the appellant also filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs and Central Excise which was dismissed vide order dated 8-4-2003. The appellant preferred appeal u/s 35B of Central Excise Act, 1944 before the Central Excise and Service Tax Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "TRIBUNAL") viz. Appeal No. ST/18/03 against the order dated 8-4-2003, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
