9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 23X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... play and distribution of advertising materials, leaflets, etc. The dispute in the present appeal relates to the period 1.4.2003 to 31.03.2007 with reference to service tax liability of the appellant under "Business Auxiliary Service", "sale of space or time", "advertising agency service" and "programme producer service". The Original Authority confirmed a service tax liability of Rs. 80,63,100/- and also denied cenvat credit of Rs. 7,83,287/- on the ground that the said credit was not available to the appellants in terms of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Penalties were also imposed under Section 78 and Rule 15(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. 2. Ld. Counsel for the appellant contested the confirmation of service tax liability against the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riod 1.5.2006 to 31.03.2007 on actual receipt basis. For the service rendered prior to 1.5.2006 when there is no tax entry, the demand is not sustainable. A demand of Rs. 3,08,015/- is not sustainable on this ground. (f) The appellants have undertaken various activities of film dubbing, translating and recording songs, producing audio jingles. These are not liable to be taxed under advertising agency service. (g) The demand of service tax for agency commission is not sustainable. The demand was proposed under BAS but confirmed under Advertising Agency Service. (h) With reference to demand under programme producer service, ld. Counsel submitted that the appellants have paid service tax on actual receipt basis and produced documentary evide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion is not sustainable. 6. Similarly, there can be no tax liability on the services rendered by the appellant to the Health Authorities or State Government. The State Government is undertaking programmes for Public Health and Awareness Campaign for Polio Eradication Show. This is a public duty and part of essential State function. There is no service provider service recipient relationship in such activity carried out by the Public Health Authorities as part of the Government function. There is no payment or arrangement with individual service recipient for any service. There can be no promotion of such service by the appellant to attract tax liability under "Business Auxiliary Service". We hold that the service tax liability cannot be su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
