TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (2) TMI 709
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., to the extent of Rs. 8 crore. They also collected service tax of Rs. 62,17,080/- from their sponsors. The amount so collected was remitted to the exchequer by way of debit in their Cenvat Credit account. The department was of the view that the said activity was not a taxable service and remitting of the amount by way of debit in the Cenvat Credit account was not permissible and the amount collected should have been remitted in cash to the exchequer. The appellant once again remitted in cash the amount collected by way of service tax under protest on 24-2-2009. A show cause notice dated 10-6-2009 was issued to the appellant for vacation of protest and appropriation of the amount paid in cash and for imposition of penalty under section 77 o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arged the liability, they are not liable to pay an interest and no penalty is imposable in view of the bonafide conduct of the appellant. 2.4 The appellant has sought for refund of the service tax paid in cash which is pending adjudication. In any case, the adjudicating authority should have restored the cenvat credit debited towards discharge of liability which has not been done in the present case. In view of the above, he pleads for allowing the appeal. 3. The Asst. Commissioner (AR) appearing for the Revenue submits that the appellant is not a service provider of any output service as defined in law and therefore, he could not have availed any cenvat credit at all for discharge of liability. Section 73A(2) mandates that any person who....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... referred to in sub-clause (zzp) of clause (105) of section 65 of the Finance Act, provident by the provider of taxable service, to a customer, client, subscriber, policy holder or any other person, as the case may be. And the expressions 'provider' and 'provided' shall be construed accordingly. (q) 'person liable for paying service tax' has the meaning as assigned to it' in clause (d) of sub-rule (1) of rule 2 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. (r) 'provider of taxable service' include a person liable for paying service tax." 4.2 From a combined and harmonious reading of the above provisions, it clearly emerges that, - (a) Sponsorship of sporting events was not a 'taxable service' and therefore, it was not an 'outp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ially processed; 3) payment of an amount equal to the cenvat credit on capital goods if such capital goods are removed as such; 4) payment of an amount under sub-rule (2) of rule 16 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002; or 5) payment of service tax on any output service. The said rule did not provide for utilisation of cenvat credit for payment of the amount specified in section 73A (2) of the Finance Act, 1994 or section 11D of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 4.5 Since in the present case, the appellant was not a provider of any output service, he could not have taken any cenvat credit on the input or input services. Further he could not have utilised the credit for payment of the amount envisaged under section 73A(2). Thus, the discharge of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....powers conferred on the Central Government. 4.7 As regards the reliance placed by the appellant on the decision of the Tribunal on the Unison Metals case, we find that the same is misplaced. In the said case the issue for consideration was whether the amount of 8% debited from the RG 23A Part II in terms of provisions of Rule 57CC(1) and collected from the customers is required to be deposited with the Govt. in terms of the provisions of section 11D of the Central Excise Act. The Tribunal held that since the amount collected was not retained by the manufacturer but had already been remitted to the exchequer, provisions of section 11D are not applicable. That is not the issue before us in the present case. Therefore, the ratio of the said d....