TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (4) TMI 168
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....category of Broadcasting Services, the appellant further issued bills to their clients. The bills issued by them included the gross value of Broadcasting services and the service tax charged by the electronic media company namely M/s. Sahara (India) Pvt. Ltd. Thus, the appellant collected full transaction value on these service fees including broadcasting agency charges as well as service tax on the said charges from their clients. The appellant have passed on the service tax burden borne by the electronic media to their client. 02. The case of the department is that since the appellant have collected the service tax from their client by raising the bills, the same service tax was liable to be recovered under Section 73(A) of the Finance A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... electronic media. The demand in the present case was raised under Section 73(A) on the ground that the appellant have collected the service tax from their client and not deposited to the Government Exchequer. There is no dispute that the service tax amount collected by the appellant from their client already stand deposited to the Government Exchequer by the electronic media company namely M/s. Sahara (India) Pvt. Ltd therefore, the provision of Section 73(A) cannot be invoked in the facts of the present case. This tribunal in the appellant's own case against the Order-In-Original dated 07.08.2014 which is genesis of these cases set aside the demand. The said order is reproduced below:- 4. We have heard both the sides and perused the rec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... person shall forthwith pay the amount so collected to the credit of the Central Government." It can be seen from the above reproduced provisions that the said provisions of Section73A of the Act are applicable where the amount of service tax has been collected and retained by the assessee. In the present case, it is admitted facts that that no service tax was chargeable on the activity of the appellant, since the activity of Appellant do not qualify them as a broadcasting agency nor can be classified under Broadcasting Services. It is also true that Section73A (2) which mandated that any person who collects any amount as representing service tax to deposit it with the Government also. In the present case demand of service tax under the p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ilities of service tax under the category of broadcasting service. Clearly, the role in the entire transaction of appellant is just like an mediator who collects money from the clients on behalf of the broadcasting company. It is also admitted fact in the present case that the retainership fees or commission income separately charged and collected from the clients, appellant paid the service tax under the advertising services. The said undisputed facts clearly established that the present one is not a case where the appellant had collected any amount as service tax and retained the same by not depositing the same with the Government exchequer. We find that the Appellant has collected the service tax from the clients on behalf of Broadcaster....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ernment as allegedly collected by the appellant from clients against the Broadcasting Services and demand of service tax again from the appellant would amount to double payment. However, the Broadcasters having already paid such collected amount to the government, the appellant cannot be asked to deposit the same again with the Government exchequer. It is our considered view, that once tax has already been paid on the services, it was not open to the Department to confirm the same against the appellant, in respect of the same services. Accordingly, the impugned order liable to be set aside. Since the entire case is being decided on merit, we do not go into limitation and time bar issues raised by the Ld. Counsel. 5. In view of above discu....