TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 723X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I 534 - CESTAT KOLKATA] has relied on the case of CST, DELHI VERSUS MS. SHRIYA SARAN [ 2014 (7) TMI 78 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] and the Hon ble Calcutta High Court s decision in the case of COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX AND ANR. VERSUS SOURAV GANGULY AND ORS. [ 2019 (10) TMI 221 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] and this judgment has been followed in many other cases. The Hon ble High Court of Calcutta held that the remuneration received by the petitioner from the IPL franchisee could not be taxed under business support service. The issue is no longer res integra - Appeal allowed. - MR. S. S. GARG, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND MR. P. ANJANI KUMAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Chartered Accountant for the Appellant Shri Pawan Kumar, Authorised Repre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, in favour of various players of IPL. He relies on the following cases: Sourav Ganguly v. Union of India Ors.(2016) 96 CCH 0150-Kol HC Commissioner of Service Tax Anr. v. Sourav Ganguly Ors.F.M.A.No.2102 of 2018 Dtd. 14.08.2019-Kol HC Sourav Ganguly v. Comm. of Service Tax, Kolkata-ST No. 77117 of 2019 Dtd. 14.12.2020-Kol. Tribunal. Pinal Rohit Shah v. C.C.E. S.T-ST No. 13204 of 2013 dtd. 21.06.2023-Ahd. Tribunal. Rahul Dravid v. Comm. of ST- [2012] 23 taxmann.com 439 Bang. Tribunal. Yusufſkhan M. Pathan v. C.C.E. ST. [2024] 158 taxmann.com 22 Ahd. Tribunal. R. Ashwin v. Comm. of GST and Central Excise-[2024] 159 taxmann.com 504 CE, C CGT-Delhi-iii v. Piyush Chawla- ST/54359/2015 Dtd. 03.07.2018-Del. Tribunal. Karan Sharma v. C.C.E. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isee. The apparel that he had to wear was team clothing and the same could not exhibit any badge, logo, mark, trade name etc.. The petitioner was not providing any service as an independent individual worker. His status was that of an employee rather than an independent worker or contractor or consultant. In my opinion, it cannot be said that the petitioner was rendering any service which could be classified as business support service. He was simply a purchased member of a team serving and performing under KKR and was not providing any service to KKR as an individual. In this regard, I fully endorse and agree with the order dated 6 June, 2014 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) Delhi-III in Appeal No. 330- 332/SVS/RTK/20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or playing matches, such a liability cannot be created by issuing a letter/instruction/circular. A circular cannot travel beyond the statute. The statute does not provide that if a player receives a composite amount for playing matches and promotional activities and the segregation of the two elements is not possible, then the composite entire amount may be taxed. Such an act on the part of the Department will be de hors the statute and without jurisdiction or authority of law. It will also be in contravention of Art. 265 of the Constitution of India. The Central Board of Excise and Customs cannot seek to legislate by issuing circulars/instructions. As observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ratan Melting Wire Industries (s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
