SHARE

| Nov-24-2021

Quashed Service tax demand on movie exhibitor under the category of Business Support Service

In Inox Leisure Ltd. v. Commissioner of Service Tax [Service Tax Appeal No. 30489 of 2016 decided on October 20, 2021] Hon’ble Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad (“CESTAT”) held that service of providing exhibition of movies by the exhibitor to the producers/distributors of such movies is not a support or assistance activity but is an activity on its own accord, therefore does not fall under the category of Business Support Service (“BSS”) as per Section 73(1A) of the Finance Act, 1994 (“the Finance Act”).

Inox Leisure Ltd (“the Appellant”) has challenged the order passed by the Commissioner (“Impugned Order”) affirming the proposed service tax demand of Rs. 32,81,940/- under the BSS as per Section 73(1A) of the Finance Act together with interest and penalty.

The department is of the view that the Appellant provides infrastructure support service (“ISS”) as part of BSS to the to the producers/distributors of films which falls within the definition of taxable service category of BSS defined under Section 65(104c) of the Finance Act.

The Hon’ble CESTAT observed that, the agreement between producer/distributor engaged in business of production and distribution of films and the Appellant is of such nature that both the parties work independently and does not interfere or influence any decision on the other party.

Observed that, the Appellant screens/exhibits a movie that has been provided by the distributor and such exhibition is not a support or assistance activity but is an activity on its own accord, thus does not fulfill the requirements of above-mentioned provisions of Finance Act and further held that such activity cannot fall under BSS.

Held that, in view of the decision of Supreme Court in Faqir Chand Gulati vs. Uppal Agencies Pvt. Ltd. [2008 (12) STR 401] and the decision of the Tribunal in Commissioner vs. Mormugao Port Trust [2018 (19) GSTL J 118 (SC)] no service tax can be levied on the Appellant under BSS.

(Author can be reached at info@a2ztaxcorp.com)

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed are strictly of the author and A2Z Taxcorp LLP. The contents of this article are solely for informational purpose and for the reader’s personal non-commercial use. It does not constitute professional advice or recommendation of firm. Neither the author nor firm and its affiliates accepts any liabilities for any loss or damage of any kind arising out of any information in this article nor for any actions taken in reliance thereon. Further, no portion of our article or newsletter should be used for any purpose(s) unless authorized in writing and we reserve a legal right for any infringement on usage of our article or newsletter without prior permission.

Similar reads

Appellant is entitled to interest from the date of deposit to the date of refund

The CESTAT, New Delhi in the matter of M/s BBM Impex Pvt. Limited v. Principal Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) [Customs Early Hearing Application No.50414 of 2022 with Customs Appeal No. 51662 of

Nov-24-2021

Read More

Waiver of pre-deposit is not tenable on account of financial inability

The CESTAT, New Delhi in the matter of M/s Prem Kumar Ojha v. Commissioner of Customs-Jaipur I [Customs Miscellaneous Application No. 50245 of 2022 dated July 04, 2022] held that, in view

Nov-24-2021

Read More

Excise duty cannot be demanded for clandestine removal based on third party evidence

The CESTAT, New Delhi in the matter of M/s Shri Shyam Ingot & Castings Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise [Excise Appeal No. 52550 of 2019-SM dated August 08, 2022] held

Nov-24-2021

Read More

Arbitrary valuation of goods not subjected to BIS specifications is invalid

The CESTAT, Chennai in the matter of M/s. SK Enterprises v The Commissioner of Customs [CUSTOMS APPEAL No. 40017 of 2022 dated June 24, 2022] set aside and held that the revaluation of the goods

Nov-24-2021

Read More

EOU not entitled to claim refund of TED on its own, may avail of the entitlements of DTA supplier specified in FTP

The Supreme Court of India in the matter of Sandoz Private Limited v. Union of India [Civil Appeal No. 3358 of 2020 dated January 4, 2020] upheld the decision of the Bombay High Court that Export

Nov-24-2021

Read More