2015 (11) TMI 1108

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s are identical and arising out of a common Order in Appeal No. 01 to 26/2014 (MST) dated 29.01.2014, all the 22 stay applications are taken up together for disposal. 2. The issue relates to demand of service tax on the applicants who played/participated in IPL tournament conducted by the respective promoters/sponsors as per the contract. The adjudicating authority confirmed the service tax demands for the period from April, 2008 to June, 2010 under Business Support Service and for the period July,2010 to March,2011 under Brand Promotions Service. 3. On appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), the lower appellate authority partially allowed their appeals and set aside that portion of the order relating to demand under BSS (prior to 0....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ndings of the Commissioner (Appeals) and submits that the players promote the brand value of the franchisee. There cannot be any differentiation between play and promotion of brand. Players have been taken on contract by the franchisee to promote their brand value. He also submits that the entire brand value is built around the players. The Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly denied SSI exemption. He submits that in DLF Ltd. (supra) relied by the applicants pertains to the period prior to April, 2010. 6. Carefully considered submissions of both sides and we find that the lower appellate authority set aside the demand under BSS (Business Support Services) for the period April, 2008 to June, 2010 and confirmed the demand under BPS (Brand Pr....