2026 (3) TMI 351

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt had contractual agreement for promoting/marketing logos/brands/marks of the franchisee and sponsors and has received remuneration from the same and that the same is taxable under "business support services" as per Section 65 (104c) of the Finance Act, 1994. A Show-Cause Notice dated 02.04.2013 demanding service tax of Rs. 1,85,835/-, along with penalty and interest, for the remuneration received during the years 2008-09 and 2009-10. Assistant Commissioner vide order dated 25.02.2014 confirmed the demand along with interest and imposing equal penalty under Section 78 and penalty of Rs. 5,000/- under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. On an appeal preferred by the appellants, Commissioner (Appeals) vide order dated 31.12.2015 upheld the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Saran- [2014] 48 taxmann.com 209-Del. Tribunal. • Comm. Of C.C.E., Goa v. Swapnil Asnodkar-2018(1) TMI 266 Dtd. 10.11.2017- Mum. Tribunal. • Faiz Fazal v. C.C.E. Nagpur- ST/86456/14- Mum. Tribunal. 3. Shri Aniram Meena, learned Authorized Representative for the Department, reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 4. Heard both sides and perused the records of the case. It is submitted that cases against various cricketers playing for IPL have been decided in favour of the players by the Tribunal. We find that Tribunal, in its judgment, in the case of Sourav Ganguly (supra) has relied on the case of Shriya Saran (supra) and the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court's decision in the case of Sourav Ganguly (supra) ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....en extracted above in this judgment. The petitioner is aggrieved by the instruction in the said letter to the effect that in case the players (in IPL) are paid composite fee for playing matches and for participating in promotional activities, the component of promotional activities should be segregated for charging service tax and if it cannot be done then service tax should be leviable on the total composite amount. Having considered the submissions made in this regard and the decisions cited, I am of the view that the Board of Central Excise and Customs in its administrative capacity is not entitled to impose its views on its various subordinate authorities exercising quasi-judicial functions to interpret a particular provision of a statu....