AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (8) TMI 550
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l authority confirmed the tax demand of Rs. 8,94,442/- along with interest and imposed equal penalty under section 78 besides imposing penalty under section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994. In appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the same. Hence this appeal. 2. On behalf of the appellant, the learned counsel Shri S. Venkatachalam submitted that they were engaged in doing job work to M/s. Pepsico (India) Holdings (herein after referred to as Pepsico) in fabricating and erecting signboards and also to M/s. Indian Oil Corporation (herein after referred to as IOC) in replacing and repairing stickers. He explained that the nature of work undertaken for Pepsico is such that on receipt of order from Pepsico, the appellants visited the premises of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e for Pepsico and IOC, there was no advertisement involved since there was no designing or visualizing done by the appellant. The learned counsel then referred to the Trade Notice No. 99/GL.90/C.E./PRO/CAL-II/99 dated 16.9.1999 wherein it was clarified that only if the person undertakes any activity relating to making or preparation of an advertisement, such as designing, visualizing, conceptualizing etc. will be subject to levy of service tax under the category of Advertisement Agency Service . That in the case of Ajanta Fabrication Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise 2006 (4) STR 605 (Tri. Del.), it was held that mere making of hoardings, sign boards and signage without partaking in the designing, visualizing and conceptualizing of adverti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ause notice is dated 12/20.4.2005. The appellant has fully cooperated with the investigation conducted and supplied all information as required by the department called for. Further, the demand is based merely on the records maintained by the appellant and the appellant has not suppressed any facts. The appellant had not taken registration nor paid service tax only on the bonafide belief that the activities are not liable to service tax and for the reason that the appellant would not fall under the definition of Advertising Agency . He argued that there were several decisions in favour of the appellant and also the Board s Trade Notice which clarified that unless there is any activity involving preparation, designing and visualization, an a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n regard to Indian Oil Corporation, shows the following:- (i) Main sign pole repainting, letter fixing and restickering work (ii) Main sign logo Restickering Hindi letters only (iii) Agralic letters - R.O. Name to fixed in the R.O. (company owned company operated outlet) (iv) Colouring as above (blue) (v) Facility Board restickering with laminating with size 37 x 49 7. Thus, the argument of the appellant that they simply fabricate signboards such as glow signboards, front lit boards etc. on printed flex boards supplied by Pepsico containing the advertisement material and in the case of Indian Oil Corporation, they simply do the restickering of vinyl stickers etc. finds support from the purchase orders. The appellants have also relied....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Trade Notice issued by the Kolkata Commissionerate stated that if the persons undertake any activity relating to making or preparation of advertisement, such as designing, visualizing, conceptualizing etc. only they will be liable to service tax. It was made clear in such Notice that the activity of printing or readymade advertisement from the advertiser and publishing the same in the directory would not amount to advertising agency. In the decision rendered by the Tribunal in the case of Ajanta Fabrication (supra), a similar view was taken. The Tribunal in the case of Zodiac Advertisers (supra) also had come to the conclusion that when there is no evidence to show that the assessee had involved in preparation, making of the advertisement a....