2023 (6) TMI 956

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ellant Shri Vijay G. Iyengar, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Brief fact of the case are that the appellant is a cricket player and engaged in playing cricket in Indian Premier League for a team owned by M/s. Indiawin Sports Private Limited, Mumbai (ISPL for short) (formerly known as Rathipriya Trading Private Ltd). Under the agreement between ISPL and the appellant S....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or employment of the appellant with ISPL it shall not attract service tax. This issue is settled in the following judgments:- • Yusuf khan M Pathan vide CESTAT Order No. A/10086-10087/2023 dated 20.01.2023. • Commissioner of Cus. & C.Ex., Goa Vs. Swapnil Asnodkar - 2018 (10) G.S.T.L. 479 (Tr. Mumbai). • C.E, C & CGT - Delhi Vs. Piyush Chawal - 2018 (7) TMI- 1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lying on the High Court in the case of Sourav Ganguly Vs. UOI & other - 2016 (7) TMI 237- CALCUTTA HIGH COURT held that arrangement between the owner Company and the cricket player is of employment hence, players are not directly involved in brand promotion of a brand owner. Therefore, the activity of the cricket player does not fall under the category of Business Auxiliary Services. AS per this s....