Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Avon Awning (Proprietor late Nand Kishore Chaddha, through legal heir Smt. Krishna Chaddha) Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & S. Tax, Ghaziabad

2016 (10) TMI 683 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD

Advertising agency services - manufacture and trading of advertisement material including preparation of flex printed, backlit banners, flex board and unlit etc - making of advertisements - preparation of advertisements - whether the appellant was an advertising agency and the services rendered by the appellant part take of or include the services in the nature of designing, conceptualizing, visualizing, normally rendered by the Advertising Agency and is appellant liable to service tax? - Held t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d that the appellant is not equipped for functioning as an advertising agency and thus, the services rendered by the appellant did not part take of or include the services in the nature of designing, conceptualizing, visualizing, normally rendered by the Advertising Agency. The extended definition, cannot bring an entirely alien and unconnected services or a manufacturing activity within scheme of levy of service. And accordingly held that Ajanta Fabrication was not covered within the ambit of S .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of advertisements boards, display banners etc. They are in appeal against Order-in-Original No.01/ST/COMMR./2010 dated 16.02.2010 passed by Commissioner Central Excise & S. Tax, Kanpur, demanding Service Tax of ₹ 85,13,113/- along with interest and further penalty under Section 76, 77 & 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. 2. The brief facts are that the appellant carries on the business of manufacture and trading of advertisement material including preparation of flex printed, backlit ban .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

igns) should be presented the assessees is concerned with only re-producing the material taking into consideration the given guidelines in terms of size of lettering, placement of letters or pictures etc. Moreover, no evidence is produced from the Department's investigation to confirm the assessee is carrying out the activity of designing, visualizing or conceptualizing the material, which appears on the awnings/sign boards/hoardings. In absence of corroborative evidence, it is further obser .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sidering the other aspect of display or exhibition, Ld. Commissioner observes that the assessee's activities include delivery, installation and display of the awnings/sign boards/hoardings at the chosen premises. It is further observed that the appellant have admitted on record that after completion of the activity of the installation and display a satisfactory/installation certificate is issued, which bears the signature of the employees of the assessee as well as their client. It is only a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

aced by the appellant on the case of Tecumseh Products India Ltd. Vs. C.C.E. reported at 2004(167) E.L.T. 498 (SC), which deals with a bona fide dispute in regard to the question whether an activity involved any manufacturing activity or not, which is clearly not applicable in the present case. The Ld. Commissioner have held the extended period to be invocable and accordingly confirmed the duty with interest and penalty. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in Appeal before this Tribunal. 3. Heard .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

per the order and have also charged Sales Tax/VAT on the full invoice value. We also put enquiry to the LD. AR for revenue as to whether there is any evidence of receipt/collection of charges towards display or exhibition and installation by the Appellant. But, no instance of any levy or collection of such charges could be pointed out from the facts on record. 5. The Ld. AR for Revenue has pointed out from RUD-4 at Page 76 of the paper book, wherein in the purchase order by Exide Industries Ltd. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ement or displaying advisement like in the case of cinema slides or an advertisement making vehicle moving around, etc. 7. The counsel for the appellant has also relied on the ruling of coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Ajanta Fabrication Vs. CCE reported in 2006(4) STR 605 (Tri-Delhi), wherein under similar activity of making of hoardings, sign boards & signage, design of signage and their colour schemes etc. provided by the purchaser. This Tribunal held that the appellant is .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version