2019 (2) TMI 91

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Finance Act, 1994, the photography service was brought within the service tax net with effect from 16.7.2001 and the definition of the said services included any professional photographer or any person engaged in the business of rendering service relating to photography. The department was of the view that the appellant has rendered photography service for the period October 2002 to September 2006 and has not discharged the service tax. Show cause notice was issued proposing to demand the service tax along with interest and also for imposition of penalties. After adjudication, the original authority confirmed the demand of Rs. 11,41,608/- along with interest and imposed equal penalty, giving the option of reduced penalty. A penalty of Rs. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as his bonafide belief that he was not rendering any photography service since he was not rendering from fixed place like a studio. Therefore, he pleaded that the benefit of section 80 may be invoked to set aside the penalties, 3. The ld. AR Ms. T. Usha Devi supported the findings in the impugned order. She submitted that the appellant has collected huge amount as consideration for the photography service. He was engaged in making advertisement film which is a cinematographic film and various other photography services. The contention of the appellant that he does not own a studio and therefore would not come within service tax net cannot be accepted. The appellant is not an amateur photographer and as being a professional photographer w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1,41,18,840/- for the period under dispute would fall into the category of professional photographer. Merely because the appellant does not have a studio or has own industry not registered as commercial concern would not take him out of the ambit of the photography service as he is a professional photographer. We therefore conclude that the demand raised as well as interest is legal and proper. The issue on merits with respect to the demand raised is held against the assessee. 7. The ld. counsel has vehemently argued to waive the penalty imposed under section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The authorities below have imposed an equal penalty under section 78 of the Finance Act. There is nothing brought out from evidence that appellant has s....