9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 1417X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appearing in that order, insofar as the issue of Central Value Added Tax ["CENVAT"] Credit was concerned, the same came to be lent a quietus at the stage of appeal itself. The only issue which thereafter appears to have survived for the consideration of CESTAT was with respect to the service tax liability in respect of advertising services. 3. The CESTAT in paragraph 6 of its order records that the appellant in terms of its contract with the Government agency was also obliged to undertake advertising in respect of the toilet blocks, bus queue shelters and other utility services. For the purposes of fulfilment of that contractual obligation, the appellant is stated to have engaged the services of M/s Prime Site and M/s Graphis Ads. It was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsultant. These definitions make it clear that scope of service which is included in the tax net extends not only to the person involved in making or preparing of advertisements but also includes the service by the person involved in display or exhibition of the advertisement. 9. From the admitted agreement of the appellant it is clear that the appellant had contracted with the M/s. Prime Site and M/s. Graphics Ads for the making or preparation of the advertisements which were to be displayed by the appellant at the site to be constructed by him under an agreement in his favour by MCD. Thus, irrespective M/s. Prime Site and M/s. Graphis Ads had charged the service tax from their clients (for the preparation of the advertisements) and dis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... culating the service tax liability of the appellant. We accordingly, are of the opinion that the adjudicating authority below have rightly confirmed the said demand. We find no infirmity in the order to that extent accordingly we hereby confirm the demand. Even if the circular of 23.08.2007 is not taken into consideration the above discussion still holds good. The argument of the appellant to that effect is, therefore not sustainable. The authority relied upon is also not applicable for the said reason." 6. Having considered the submissions addressed and the reasoning assigned by CESTAT we find no merit in the challenge as raised. It becomes pertinent to note that the engagement of the sub-contractors was solely for the purposes of discha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
