https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446883 CESTAT Chennai held that amounts received by a professional cricketer from India Cements Ltd. under IPL playing contract were not subject to service tax as brand promotional activities. The tribunal determined the contract was employment-based, not service provision, as the player was under control and supervision of the franchisee, restricted from playing for other teams, received fixed remuneration, and was primarily hired to play cricket rather than conduct promotional activities. The promotional activities were incidental to the dominant cricket-playing obligation. Following precedents in similar cases, the tribunal set aside the service tax demand and allowed the appeal. en-us Wed, 13 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Dec 2023 08:28:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446883 CESTAT Chennai held that amounts received by a professional cricketer from India Cements Ltd. under IPL playing contract were not subject to service tax as brand promotional activities. The tribunal determined the contract was employment-based, not service provision, as the player was under control and supervision of the franchisee, restricted from playing for other teams, received fixed remuneration, and was primarily hired to play cricket rather than conduct promotional activities. The promotional activities were incidental to the dominant cricket-playing obligation. Following precedents in similar cases, the tribunal set aside the service tax demand and allowed the appeal. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 13 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446883