{"id":311487,"date":"2024-01-16T10:00:47","date_gmt":"2024-01-16T04:30:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=311487"},"modified":"2024-01-30T09:19:37","modified_gmt":"2024-01-30T03:49:37","slug":"demand-of-service-tax-u-s-73-a-of-finance-ac-incorrect-when-broadcasters-service-tax-is-not-retained-cestat-legal-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/16\/demand-of-service-tax-u-s-73-a-of-finance-ac-incorrect-when-broadcasters-service-tax-is-not-retained-cestat-legal-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Demand of service tax u\/s 73-A of Finance Act, 1994 incorrect when broadcaster\u2019s service tax is collected and not retained: CESTAT reiterates"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Ahmedabad –<\/span> In the present appeal, the bench of Somesh Arora, (Judicial Member) and C.L Mahar, (Technical Member) opined that appellant acted only as an agent\/mediator\/facilitator who collected money on the behalf of the broadcasting company from the clients and had not retained the collected amount, hence the Tribunal set aside the impugned order. The Tribunal held that the determination of revenue neutrality was a question of fact and thus directed the Department to examine in detail whether the machinery provisions by way of scheme adopted by the assessee were misused. Further, the matter was remanded for a relook.<\/p>\n

Background<\/p>\n

Appellant was an advertising agency, who used to book either spaces in the print media or time slots in the electronic media, sold them to various clients and received payments.<\/p>\n

The jurisdictional officer issued letters and called for appellant’s accounting records and after scrutiny, it was revealed that appellant purchased timeslots from the electronic media for which they got agency commission and then sold these to their clients and charged them service tax. Further, appellant issued bills to the clients for rendering advertising services and these bills included the gross value of broadcasting services and the service tax charged by the electronic media.<\/p>\n

Thus, on audit it appeared to the Department that appellant collected full transaction value of advertising service fees including broadcasting agency charges as well as service tax from their clients, despite the fact that appellant was neither a broadcasting agency under Section 65(16)<\/a> of the Finance Act, 1994<\/a> (‘Act’) nor had provided broadcasting services to their clients but collected service tax on the broadcasting charges from their clients.<\/p>\n

Therefore, appellant had contravened the provisions of Section 73-A(2)<\/a> of the Act<\/a> and had failed to pay the amount so collected to the Central Government and hence the amount of service tax so recovered by appellant from their clients was required to be recovered from them under Section 73-A(3)<\/a> of the Act<\/a>. Since, appellant had contravened the provisions of Section 68<\/a> of the Act<\/a>, they were liable to pay a penalty under Section 76<\/a> of the Act<\/a>. Further, appellant failed to include the taxable value in the relevant ST-3 returns with the department hence was also liable for penalty action under Section 77<\/a> of the Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n

It also appeared that appellant wilfully suppressed the facts from respondent by not declaring the material facts and the correct value of taxable services, and thus was guilty of wilful suppression of actual liability of service tax with intent to evade payment of service tax. Respondent contented that appellant also had failed to deposit the service tax collected by them from the clients to the credit of the Central Government, and hence appellant was also liable for penalty under Section 78<\/a> of the Act<\/a>. A show-cause notice was issued to appellant and subsequently, the matter was heard and decided by the Commissioner who conformed the show cause notice and imposed penalties. Aggrieved by the order, appellant filed the present appeal.<\/p>\n

Analysis, Law, and Decision<\/p>\n

Lawful deposit of tax:<\/p>\n

The Tribunal analysed the activity and bills of appellant and found that in addition to the service of advertising agency, appellant had been acting as a mediator between the broadcasting companies and clients. The Tribunal opined that appellant had collected the service tax from the clients on behalf of Broadcasters in relations to service of “Broadcasting services” and had transferred the said service tax amount to Broadcaster for discharging service tax liability and broadcasting companies deposited such amount of service tax with the Government and discharged their duties. The demand of service tax again from appellant would amount to double payment.<\/p>\n

The Tribunal opined that since no amount was retained by appellant, demand of service tax by applying the provisions of Section 73-A<\/a> of the Finance Act, 1994<\/a> was not correct. The transaction of appellant was not covered under the provisions of Section 73-A of the Act and therefore, the impugned order confirming demand under Section 73-A of the Act was not sustainable and needed to be set aside.<\/p>\n

Tax neutrality:<\/p>\n

The Tribunal opined that the taxes were not only required to be paid but also required to be paid as per the machinery provisions, including the designated point of time of taxation. Any variation from it would have interest repercussions and assessee could not take shelter under the old concept of revenue neutrality, which was relevant in central fiscal legislations, only till the time, interest was not factored in machinery provisions. Therefore, the argument of appellant of revenue neutrality, appeared rejectable.<\/p>\n

The Tribunal opined that determination of revenue neutrality was a question of fact and if machinery provisions by way of scheme adopted by the assessee were misused by allowing improper gain by way of saving of interest over normal machinery provisions relating to point of taxation and payment of duty, same could still result in demand of interest and penalties.<\/p>\n

Therefore, the Tribunal remanded the matter for a relook as far as the interest and penalties were concerned in accordance with the provision of Finance Act, vis-à-vis, the scheme adopted by appellant, in accordance with the contract entered by them and broadcasters. Penalties likewise were to be confined for breach of machinery provisions only, if so found and not for intent to evade considering the legalities of issue involved.<\/p>\n

[Ddb Mudra Pvt Ltd. v. CST – Service Tax, Ahmedabad, 2024 SCC OnLine CESTAT 2<\/a>, decided on 09-01-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

For the Appellant:<\/span> A R Krishnan, Consultant<\/p>\n

For the Respondent:<\/span> A R Kanani, Superintendent (AR)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“With coming into force of interest provisions, the revenue neutrality concept has undergone a change, so as to consider duty neutrality different from revenue (Duty+interest) neutrality. Latter at time may not exist, even if former is present.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":311490,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,11],"tags":[31242,52583,64393,6651,64396,30592,34483,31345,37304,64394,64397,64395,42792],"class_list":["post-311487","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-tribunals_commissions_regulatorybodies","tag-assessee","tag-broadcaster","tag-c-s-t-service-tax","tag-cestat","tag-collected","tag-demand","tag-finance-act-1994","tag-mediator","tag-penalties","tag-remanded","tag-retained","tag-section-73-a","tag-tribunal"],"yoast_head":"\nDemand of service tax u\/s 73-A of Finance Act, 1994 incorrect when broadcaster\u2019s service tax is collected and not retained: CESTAT reiterates | SCC Blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"CESTAT reiterated that demand of service tax u\/s 73-A of Finance Act, 1994 was incorrect when broadcaster\u2019s service tax was collected, but was not retained.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/16\/demand-of-service-tax-u-s-73-a-of-finance-ac-incorrect-when-broadcasters-service-tax-is-not-retained-cestat-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Demand of service tax u\/s 73-A of Finance Act, 1994 incorrect when broadcaster\u2019s service tax is collected and not retained: CESTAT reiterates\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"CESTAT reiterated that demand of service tax u\/s 73-A of Finance Act, 1994 was incorrect when broadcaster\u2019s service tax was collected, but was not retained.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/16\/demand-of-service-tax-u-s-73-a-of-finance-ac-incorrect-when-broadcasters-service-tax-is-not-retained-cestat-legal-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2024-01-16T04:30:47+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-01-30T03:49:37+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/CESTAT-2.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Simranjeet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Demand of service tax u\/s 73-A of Finance Act, 1994 incorrect when broadcaster\u2019s service tax is collected and not retained: CESTAT reiterates\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Simranjeet\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/16\/demand-of-service-tax-u-s-73-a-of-finance-ac-incorrect-when-broadcasters-service-tax-is-not-retained-cestat-legal-news\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/16\/demand-of-service-tax-u-s-73-a-of-finance-ac-incorrect-when-broadcasters-service-tax-is-not-retained-cestat-legal-news\/\",\"name\":\"Demand of service tax u\/s 73-A of Finance Act, 1994 incorrect when broadcaster\u2019s service tax is collected and not retained: CESTAT reiterates | SCC Blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/16\/demand-of-service-tax-u-s-73-a-of-finance-ac-incorrect-when-broadcasters-service-tax-is-not-retained-cestat-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/16\/demand-of-service-tax-u-s-73-a-of-finance-ac-incorrect-when-broadcasters-service-tax-is-not-retained-cestat-legal-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/CESTAT-2.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-01-16T04:30:47+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-01-30T03:49:37+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd\"},\"description\":\"CESTAT reiterated that demand of service tax u\/s 73-A of Finance Act, 1994 was incorrect when broadcaster\u2019s service tax was collected, but was not retained.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/16\/demand-of-service-tax-u-s-73-a-of-finance-ac-incorrect-when-broadcasters-service-tax-is-not-retained-cestat-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/16\/demand-of-service-tax-u-s-73-a-of-finance-ac-incorrect-when-broadcasters-service-tax-is-not-retained-cestat-legal-news\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/16\/demand-of-service-tax-u-s-73-a-of-finance-ac-incorrect-when-broadcasters-service-tax-is-not-retained-cestat-legal-news\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/CESTAT-2.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/CESTAT-2.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"CESTAT\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/16\/demand-of-service-tax-u-s-73-a-of-finance-ac-incorrect-when-broadcasters-service-tax-is-not-retained-cestat-legal-news\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Demand of service tax u\/s 73-A of Finance Act, 1994 incorrect when broadcaster\u2019s service tax is collected and not retained: CESTAT reiterates\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd\",\"name\":\"Simranjeet\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Simranjeet\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Demand of service tax u\/s 73-A of Finance Act, 1994 incorrect when broadcaster\u2019s service tax is collected and not retained: CESTAT reiterates | SCC Blog","description":"CESTAT reiterated that demand of service tax u\/s 73-A of Finance Act, 1994 was incorrect when broadcaster\u2019s service tax was collected, but was not retained.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/16\/demand-of-service-tax-u-s-73-a-of-finance-ac-incorrect-when-broadcasters-service-tax-is-not-retained-cestat-legal-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Demand of service tax u\/s 73-A of Finance Act, 1994 incorrect when broadcaster\u2019s service tax is collected and not retained: CESTAT reiterates","og_description":"CESTAT reiterated that demand of service tax u\/s 73-A of Finance Act, 1994 was incorrect when broadcaster\u2019s service tax was collected, but was not retained.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/16\/demand-of-service-tax-u-s-73-a-of-finance-ac-incorrect-when-broadcasters-service-tax-is-not-retained-cestat-legal-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-01-16T04:30:47+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-01-30T03:49:37+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/CESTAT-2.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Simranjeet","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Demand of service tax u\/s 73-A of Finance Act, 1994 incorrect when broadcaster\u2019s service tax is collected and not retained: CESTAT reiterates","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Simranjeet","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/16\/demand-of-service-tax-u-s-73-a-of-finance-ac-incorrect-when-broadcasters-service-tax-is-not-retained-cestat-legal-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/16\/demand-of-service-tax-u-s-73-a-of-finance-ac-incorrect-when-broadcasters-service-tax-is-not-retained-cestat-legal-news\/","name":"Demand of service tax u\/s 73-A of Finance Act, 1994 incorrect when broadcaster\u2019s service tax is collected and not retained: CESTAT reiterates | SCC Blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/16\/demand-of-service-tax-u-s-73-a-of-finance-ac-incorrect-when-broadcasters-service-tax-is-not-retained-cestat-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/16\/demand-of-service-tax-u-s-73-a-of-finance-ac-incorrect-when-broadcasters-service-tax-is-not-retained-cestat-legal-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/CESTAT-2.webp","datePublished":"2024-01-16T04:30:47+00:00","dateModified":"2024-01-30T03:49:37+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd"},"description":"CESTAT reiterated that demand of service tax u\/s 73-A of Finance Act, 1994 was incorrect when broadcaster\u2019s service tax was collected, but was not retained.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/16\/demand-of-service-tax-u-s-73-a-of-finance-ac-incorrect-when-broadcasters-service-tax-is-not-retained-cestat-legal-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/16\/demand-of-service-tax-u-s-73-a-of-finance-ac-incorrect-when-broadcasters-service-tax-is-not-retained-cestat-legal-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/16\/demand-of-service-tax-u-s-73-a-of-finance-ac-incorrect-when-broadcasters-service-tax-is-not-retained-cestat-legal-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/CESTAT-2.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/CESTAT-2.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"CESTAT"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/16\/demand-of-service-tax-u-s-73-a-of-finance-ac-incorrect-when-broadcasters-service-tax-is-not-retained-cestat-legal-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Demand of service tax u\/s 73-A of Finance Act, 1994 incorrect when broadcaster\u2019s service tax is collected and not retained: CESTAT reiterates"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd","name":"Simranjeet","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Simranjeet"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/CESTAT-2.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":276693,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/04\/whether-section-73a-of-the-finance-act-1994-applicable-when-service-tax-has-been-collected-and-retained-by-the-assessee-cestat-answers\/","url_meta":{"origin":311487,"position":0},"title":"Whether Section 73A of the Finance Act, 1994 applicable when service tax has been collected and retained by the Assessee; CESTAT answers","author":"Editor","date":"November 4, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal: The coram of Ramesh Nair (Judicial Member) and Raju (Technical Member) set aside the order of the Commissioner confirming imposition of service tax and interest thereon along with penalties for \u2018Broadcasting Services\u2019 on an \u2018Advertising Services\u2019 agency. The Tribunal has directed\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":269164,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/05\/can-tcs-collected-from-sale-of-scrap-be-included-in-the-assessable-value-for-charging-excise-duty-cestat-answers\/","url_meta":{"origin":311487,"position":1},"title":"Can TCS collected from sale of scrap be included in the assessable value for charging Excise Duty? CESTAT answers","author":"Editor","date":"July 5, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): The coram of Ramesh Nair (Judicial Member) and Raju (Technical Member) allowed an appeal holding that TCS collected from sale of scrap cannot be included in the assessable value for charging excise duty which was filed by the aggrieved on the dismissal\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/CESTATNew-Logo.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":253972,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/10\/cestat-discounts-offered-by-car-manufacturers-to-their-dealers-for-onward-transmission-to-corporate-customers-taxable-tribunal-explains\/","url_meta":{"origin":311487,"position":2},"title":"CESTAT | Discounts offered by car manufacturers to their dealers for onward transmission to corporate customers taxable? Tribunal explains","author":"Editor","date":"September 10, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): The Coram of CJ Mathew (Technical Member) and Ajay Sharma (Judicial Member), allowed an appeal which was filed against the impugned order of the Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax (Appeals -IV) wherein he had upheld demand of Rs 29,57,199\/-, for\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":252898,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/19\/cestat-tribunal-discusses-distinction-between-mere-provision-of-table-space-and-actual-rendering-of-service-non-discharge-of-tax-liability-as-provider-of-business-auxilia\/","url_meta":{"origin":311487,"position":3},"title":"CESTAT | Tribunal discusses distinction between mere provision of \u2018table space\u2019 and actual rendering of service; Non discharge of tax liability as provider of \u201cbusiness auxiliary service\u201d partly allowed","author":"Editor","date":"August 19, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): The Coram of CJ Mathew (Technical Member) and Ajay Sharma (Judicial Member) partly allowed an appeal which was filed with the issue of non-discharge of tax liability of Rs.17,46,066\/-, as provider of \u2018business auxiliary service\u2019, for the period between April 2007 and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":354006,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/21\/cestat-no-service-tax-on-upfront-fee-penalty-on-dmrc-set-aside\/","url_meta":{"origin":311487,"position":4},"title":"\u2018No service tax to be paid on upfront fee\/premium for agreement to lease\u2019; CESTAT sets aside penalty on DMRC","author":"Sanket","date":"July 21, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cAt the time of executing the Concession Agreements with developers, DMRC had collected \"upfront fee\" as a price for obtaining the respective Concession Agreements.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"service tax on upfront fee","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/service-tax-on-upfront-fee.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/service-tax-on-upfront-fee.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/service-tax-on-upfront-fee.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/service-tax-on-upfront-fee.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":366083,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/08\/no-service-tax-on-use-of-trade-marks-not-registered-in-india-cestat\/","url_meta":{"origin":311487,"position":5},"title":"Service tax not payable on use of trade marks not registered under Indian law: CESTAT","author":"Bharti","date":"November 8, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Intellectual property not registered in India do not constitute \u2018intellectual property rights\u2019 within the meaning of Section 65(55a) of the Finance Act, 1994 and the related services are not 'intellectual property services' within the meaning of Section 65 (55b) of the Finance Act, 1954.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"service tax on use of trade marks","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/service-tax-on-use-of-trade-marks.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/service-tax-on-use-of-trade-marks.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/service-tax-on-use-of-trade-marks.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/service-tax-on-use-of-trade-marks.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/311487","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=311487"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/311487\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/311490"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=311487"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=311487"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=311487"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}