TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (4) TMI 330
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the sale of mobile sim cards during the period from April, 2005 to December, 2008. 4. Both the lower authorities have come to the conclusion the amount received as commission by the appellant needs to be taxed under "Business Auxiliary Service". To come to such a conclusion, both the lower authorities have relied upon the frachisee agreement entered by the appellant with BSNL wherein there was a clause for provision of marketing and distribution of its telecom services of BSNL in a specific area. We find that the issue is no more res integra, the Principal Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central excise, Allahabad vs. M/s. Capital TV Service Centre - 2015-TIOL-2066-CESTAT-DEL in an identical set of facts held as under:....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pra). 6. We have considered the submissions of both sides. We find that CESTAT order dated 29.01.2014 which was issued in respect of several appellants including the respondent in this case fully covers the issue in respondent's favour. The said judgement of CESTAT refers to the judgement of Supreme Court in the case of Idea Mobile Communications Ltd Paragraphs 2,4,5,6 and 7 of the said CESTAT order are reproduced below for easy reference:- "2. The present appeal is filed against the judgment and order dated 4-9-2008 [2010 (19) S.T.R. 18 (Ker.)] passed by the Kerala High Court whereby and whereunder, the High Court allowed the appeal filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Cochin. 3. The issue which arises for our....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cise Act, 1944. There were consequential recovery proceedings against the appellant and the appellant filed Writ Petition O.P. No. 4973 of 2001 (P) in the High Court of Kerala challenging the levy of service tax on the sale price of SIM cards and also challenging the levy of sales tax on the amounts recovered by the appellant by way of activation charges from its customers which was dismissed vide order dated 15-2-2002. 6. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant filed Civil Appeal No. 2408 of 2002 before this Court. Based on the judgment of the High Court dated 15-2-2002, the appellant also filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs and Central Excise which was dismissed vide order dated 8-4-2003. The appellant preferred appeal u/s....