TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 828X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ross amount collected from the person (PCO user) and to whom the telecom services are provided. In the appellant s own case BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD. VERSUS CCE MADURAI AND VICE-VERSA [ 2018 (3) TMI 1007 - CESTAT CHENNAI] , the very same issue was considered and the Tribunal held that Explanation would take effect only from 01.03.2011 and the demand for the period prior to 01.03.2011 cannot sustain. Applying the ratio of decision in appellant s own case, it is opined that the demand cannot sustain and requires to be set aside - appeal allowed. - SERVICE TAX APPEAL No. 40129 OF 2013 - FINAL ORDER No. 40589/2023 - Dated:- 20-7-2023 - HON BLE MS. SULEKHA BEEVI C. S. , MEMBER ( JUDICIAL ) And HON BLE MR. VASA SESHAGIRI RAO , MEMBER ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om the customers. 4. With effect from 01.06.2008, it appeared that BSNL had revised their policy and restructured the tariff of PCO business. As per the revised policy issued vide Circular No.3-5/007 R C dated 11.04.2008 of BSNL, New Delhi, it appeared that the Maximum Retail Price of call charges of Re.1/- per MCU remained as such, but the nature of consideration to PCO operators was changed from commission basis to discount basis which varied from Re.0.30 to Re.0.40 per MCU. BSNL charged the PCO operators at the defined rates on the basis of volume of metered calls (slab basis) along with service tax and cess payable thereon, irrespective of the actual amount charged by the PCO operators from the users / callers of telecommunicati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e to the PCO Operators. There was a change in the tariff w.e.f. 11.04.2008. As per the revised policy of BSNL, the nature of consideration of PCO operators was changed from commission basis to discount basis which varied form 0.30 paise to 0.40 paise per Meter Call Unit. 6. The very same issue came up for consideration before the Tribunal in the appellant s own case as reported in 2019 (20) GSTL 596 (Tri.- Mad). The Tribunal took into consideration the amendment brought forth in Rule 5 (1) of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 wherein an Explanation was inserted w.e.f. 01.03.2011. The said Explanation clarified that for the services specified in sub-clause (zzzx) of clause (105) of Section 6 of the Finance Ac, 1994, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the person who avails the telecom services provided. The appellant has therefore to pay service tax on the entire amount collected from the customers. The adjudicating authority has rightly confirmed the demand interest and impose penalties. It is prayed that the appeal may be dismissed. 8. Heard both sides. 9. The Ld. Counsel has submitted that though they are liable to pay service tax on the entire amount collected from the customer, the same would be applicable only w.e.f. 01.03.2011 as the said Explanation was added to the Rules only on such date. To understand the issue, the relevant provisions are noticed as under : Pre 1-6-2007 Definitions 65(105)(b). Taxable service means any service provided to a subscriber by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and to whom the telecom services are provided. In the appellant s own case [2019 (20) G.S.T.L. 596 (Tri.-Chennai)], the very same issue was considered and the Tribunal held that Explanation would take effect only from 01.03.2011 and the demand for the period prior to 01.03.2011 cannot sustain. The discussions in the appellant s own case (supra) are reproduced as under : 9 .It is seen that w.e.f. 1-3-2011, the value of taxable services in sub-clause (zzzx) of clause (105) of Section 65 namely the telecommunication services, shall be the gross amount paid by the person/PCO user to whom the telecom service is provided by the telegraph authority. The said amendment makes it clear that w.e.f. 1-3-2011, the value of taxable service would in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
