By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, FEB 24, 2017: IN this appeal filed against the order passed by CCE, Pune-III , the two issues are –

+ Whether the sponsorship of the Indian Premier League would amount to sponsorship of a sporting event for the period under dispute.

+ Whether the service tax amount received by the appellant from their other branches has been deposited by the appellant with the Government or otherwise.

The AA held that the services get classified under the definition of "sponsorship services" on a finding that appellant is paying an amount to BCCI for sponsoring of a team. It is a case of the appellant that Indian Premier League is sports event, hence not taxable under sponsorship services.

To this submission, the Bench observed that identical issue was agitated before the Tribunal in the case of Hero Motocorp Ltd - 2013-TIOL-873-CESTAT-DELand it was held that IPL is a sporting event, which order has been affirmed by the Supreme Court.

In fine, demand of service tax on this count is not sustainable, the CESTAT held.

In the matter of the second issue of collection of the amount of service tax from Kerala and Tamil Nadu on the basis of debit notes, the Bench observed that the adjudicating authority had totally misconceived the provisions of Section 73A of the FA, 1994 inasmuch as -

“7. …the said provision (of section 73A) will apply only in respect of the collection of any amount from the recipient of the taxable services, in excess of the service tax assessed or determined and paid. It is undisputed in the case in hand that appellant had discharged the correct amount of service tax from place where they were supposed to discharge the service tax liability. Collection or otherwise of the service tax from their own circles cannot be equated to collection of service tax in excess of the amount paid or determined."

The impugned order was set aside and the appeal was allowed.

(See 2017-TIOL-583-CESTAT-MUM)