Service Tax Not Leviable On IPL Promotion Activities By Anil Kumble: CESTAT

The Bangalore Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) consisting of P. Dinesha (Judicial Member) and P. Anjani Kumar (Technical Member) has held that the promotional activities undertaken by the former Indian skipper Anil Kumble shall not be treated as "business auxiliary services", so no service tax can be imposed. The department issued the show-cause notices based on the agreement between players and franchisee and the MOU between M/s. United Breweries Limited (UBL) and M/s. Royal Challengers Sports Private Limited (RCSPL), alleging that the appellant/assessee had provided the services of promotion or marketing of goods or services by engaging himself in carrying advertising, promotional activity, and team endorsement provided by RCSPL/franchisee/co-sponsors and, hence, it was taxable in terms of Section 65 (105) (zzb) of the Finance Act, 1994. It was also proposed that the assessee had also provided the services under the category of "Business Auxiliary Service." The demand for service tax was proposed to the tune of approximately Rs. 50 lakhs. The assessee filed a detailed reply denying service tax liability. However, the adjudicating authority chose to confirm the demand for service tax as well as interest and penalties as proposed. Aggrieved by the demands, the appellant filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority. The First Appellate Authority upheld the demand as per the Orders-in-Original. The appellant is before the CESTAT. The CESTAT relied on the decision of the Kolkata Bench of CESTAT in the case of Indian National Shipowners' Association Vs. Union of India in which it was held that the activity of the assessee could not be subjected to the levy of service tax under Business Auxiliary Service prior to July 1, 2010. Following the ratio of the Kolkata Bench, the Tribunal held that there was no liability on the assessee and, as a result, the service tax demands raised for both periods could not be sustained. Case Title: Anil Kumble Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Bangalore-I Commissionerate Citation: Service Tax Appeal No. 2055 of 2012 Dated: 31.03.2022 Counsel For Appellant: Senior Advocate V. Raghuraman Counsel For Respondent: Additional Commissioner P. Gopakumar Click Here To Read/Download Order

Service Tax Not Leviable On IPL Promotion Activities By Anil Kumble: CESTAT

Mariya Paliwala

Tags