2025 (8) TMI 255

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....M/s. Royal Challengers Sports Pvt. Ltd. Bangalore (RCSPL) in the Indian Premier League (IPL) matches as per the player contract agreement. The Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugend order held that the player has been granted rights for the benefit of the franchisee to exploit the commerical interest and to maximise their respective promotional benefits. Since the brand 'King Fisher' belonging to United Breweries Limited (UBL) is displayed on the clothes of the player and they function as brand ambassadors/promoters of the brands belonging to the corporates and thus, promote the business and hence, liable to service tax under 'Business Auxiliary Serivces'. Aggrieved by this order, appellant is in appeal before us. 2. The learned counsel su....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d circumstances, this Tribunal in the case of Devraj Petal vs. CST, Bangalore: (2024) 17 Centax 202 (Tri.-Bang.) held that: "4. Heard both sides. The short issue involved in the present appeal is whether the services rendered by the appellant would fall under the category of 'Business Auxiliary Service'. We find that the issue has been considered at length by the Tribunal in Sourav Ganguly's case (supra) and it is observed as follows: "52. The contention of learned counsel for the appellant is that the findings recorded by the Commissioner that the appellant did not deny that he had promoted logo/brands/marks of franchisee/sponsors is factually incorrect and even otherwise the said activity would not be covered under BAS. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....there for. Ans: No, I do not agree in principle. This is because there is a separate classification of service under Brand Ambassador promoting brand of goods/services; Mr. Sourav Ganguly has duly obtained S. Tax registration as a service provider under 'Brand Ambassador for promoting brand of goods/services'-as already stated herein above. In IPL, only Franchisee had agreements with corporate houses-not players. So, in our perception, a Franchisee is liable for payment of service tax under Business support service provided to corporate clients because of their contractual obligations - and thus, so far as players are concerned, there cannot be twice or repeat taxation on the same service." 30 ST/77117/2019 54. Question No. 4 ....