2019 (7) TMI 574

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and upheld the Order-in-Original passed by the Additional Commissioner. 2. The brief facts of the present case are that the appellants are engaged in organizing a Business Exhibition every year at Vijayawada during March, April and May and also on some special occasions like Pushkarams etc. It collects amounts from the exhibitors and provides them with tents of specific areas and other infrastructural facilities like electricity, water and sanitation. It is also providing advertising services by erecting advertisements and printing advertisements on the entry tickets during the exhibition and is collecting advertisement charges/sponsorship charges from customers. A show cause notice was issued to the appellants- a) The exhibitio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Act, 1994. Aggrieved by this order, the appellant preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who rejected the same. Hence the present appeal. 4. Heard both parties and perused the material on record. 5. Ld. Consultant appearing for the appellant submits that the impugned order is not sustainable in view of the fact that the same has been passed without appreciating the facts and the law. He further submits that the appellants have discharged the liability of service tax of Rs. 6,24,414/- towards Business Exhibition Service together with interest on 29.03.2008 well before the issuance of the show cause notice on 17.04.2008. He further submits that the penalties under sections 76 & 77 are not imposable since the appellants ha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... After considering the submissions on both sides and perusal of the material on record, we find that the appellants have paid Rs. 6,24,414/- towards Business Exhibition Service together with interest before issuance of show cause notice. Further, we find that the remaining amount of Rs. 1,75,645/- represents towards the electricity charges which were collected by the appellant from the stall owners and directly paid to the electricity department and the same does not found part of the assessable value and is not liable to pay service tax on this amount. Further, we also find that as far as the demand of service tax on advertising agency is concerned, the appellant does not fall in the definition of 'Advertising Agency' as contained in Sect....