75th Founding Day Lecture Meeting on “India@2030” Know More

March 2015

[2015] 53 taxmann.com 268 (New Delhi – CESTAT)-Coca Cola India (P.) Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Service Tax, Delhi.

By Puloma Dalal, Jayesh Gogri, Mandar telang Chartered Accountants
Reading Time 1 mins
fiogf49gjkf0d
Where service tax is paid by service provider under one category of taxable service, the same cannot once again be demanded from service receiver, under RCM by changing the category of service.

Facts:
The appellant entered into a contract with an agreement with KPH Dream Cricket Pvt. Ltd. for sponsoring cricket team Kings XI Punjab. On the said contractual consideration, service tax was collected by M/s. KPH from the appellant and deposited with the Central Government under Business Auxiliary Service. However, revenue contended that the agreement between the parties falls under the category of sponsorship service and as such, the tax liability falls on the appellant under reverse charge basis.

Held:
The Tribunal observed that, in Hero Motocorp Ltd. vs. CST [2013] 38 taxmann.com 182, cricket has been held to be not covered by the sponsorship service. Further, the service tax on the same transaction already stands deposited by service provider under the category of Business Auxiliary Services. Demand of service tax in respect of the same transaction under a different category cannot be held justifiable.

Download PDF

You May Also Like

[2015] 53 taxmann.com 206 (New Delhi – CESTAT)- Jai Mahal Hotels (P.) Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur.

[2015] 53 taxmann.com 424 (New Delhi – CESTAT)-Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-I vs. Hero Honda Motors Ltd.