By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, JULY 06, 2015: FOR supply of models for advertising purposes or actors for TV serials/films the appellant received some amount from clients.

Revenue is of the view that the service is taxable under the head "Manpower Recruitment Agency" during the period 2001-02 and 2002-03 .

Both the lower authorities have held against the appellant and, therefore, the appellant is before the CESTAT.

The Bench observed that during the period in question, the definition of Manpower Recruitment Agency read - Manpower Recruitment Agency means any commercial concern engaged in providing any service, directly or indirectly in any manner for recruitment of manpower to client.

It was also noted that subsequently, on 16.06.2005, the above said definition was substituted to read -

"Manpower Recruitment or supply Agency means any commercial concern engaged in providing any service, directly or indirectly, in any manner for recruitment or supply of manpower, temporarily or otherwise, to client."

The CESTAT concluded thus -

"7. It is undisputed fact that the appellant is only supplying models for advertising of products or TV serials/films and to other modelling agency. If that be so, in our considered view, the definition of Manpower Recruitment Agency during the period 2001-02 and 2002-03 would not cover the services rendered by the appellant of supplying models."

The Bench also observed that the above view taken is fortified by the judgment of the Tribunal in Gyarasi Lal & Co. [2009-TIOL-227-CESTAT-DEL] and CST vs. Azur Cyber P. Ltd. [2008-TIOL-2239-CESTAT-AHM] and, therefore, in view of the authoritative judicial pronouncements, the order of the Commissioner(A) was held to be unsustainable and set aside.

In fine, the appeal was allowed.

(See 2015-TIOL-1338-CESTAT-MUM )