2019 (5) TMI 58

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... May 2004 to June 2006 as provider of 'cable operator service', taxable under section 65(105)(zs) of Finance Act, 1994, besides imposing penalties under section 76,77 and 78 of Finance Act, 1994. 2. Contending that a limited aspect, which would have restricted the period of dispute and the quantification of demand, that had been submitted before the original authority had been ignored, the plea was for fresh adjudication. Elaborating upon the circumstances, Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that tax on services rendered by 'cable operator' was incorporated in the statute on 16th August 2002 with a smaller coverage that was enlarged subsequently to include 'multi system operators' in notification no. 25/2004-ST dated 10th Septembe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Court in Nizam Sugar Factory v. Collector of Central Excise, AP [2006-TIOL-56-SC-CX]. He further draws attention to letter dated 25th April 2004 which, in the acknowledged copy, elaborates upon the reasons for the practice adopted by them and that after due interaction with the tax authorities, it was decided that, instead of going the unweildy route of registering numerous cable operators, M/s Atria Convergence Technologies Pvt Ltd would obtain registration and discharge the tax liability. By letter dated 20th February 2004, the registration of individual cable operators had been surrendered. 4. Learned Authorized Representative countered that the appellant had a joint venture with the distributor of programs to function as a cable op....