The Ahmedabad Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that Baroda Cricket Association is not liable to pay service tax on capital equipment received from the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI).
The bench of Ramesh Nair (Judicial Member) and Raju (Technical Member) has observed that the appellant had received certain amounts from BCCI and on the same service tax liability has been discharged. The appellant had received certain equipment from BCCI and under the impression that the said equipment is in addition to the grant given by the BCCI, the appellant discharged service tax thereon. Later on, when the debit note was raised by the BCCI, the appellant released that the equipment received was part of the grant and not in addition to it and consequently corrected the situation by taking re-credit of the service tax paid on capital equipment.
Background
The appellant/assessee, Baroda Cricket Association is a trust, engaged in the activity of promoting Cricket in and around Vadodara. For the purpose of training young players, the appellant conducts Cricket Matches in Internation Level, National Level and State Level at different places in Vadodara region.
The appellant had conducted/ participated in different Inter District Tournament i.e. Ranjti Trophy, Duleep Trophy, Irani Trophy, Challenger Trophy, Vijay Hazare Trophy, etc.
The appellant was receiving subsidies/assistance from BCCI from time to time. The appellant had also received certain capital equipment from BCCI.
Under the mistaken belief that the capital equipment is additional subsidy/assistance from BCCI, the appellant paid service tax thereon. Later on, the BCCI informed that them the said capital received is part of the total subsidies/assistance from BCCI and not in addition to it. The appellant had also paid the service tax on “total subsidy”.
Later on, BCCI raised debit note on the appellant. In respect of the value of the goods supplied as capital equipment. Consequently, the appellant took suo moto re-credit of the service tax paid on the capital equipment.
The assessee contended that excess payment of service tax was adjusted by the appellant in terms of Rule 6(3) and Rule 6(4A) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. As per the Rule (3) and Rule 6(4A), it is permissible to adjust excess paid service tax by way of refund or adjusting the tax paid as credit. The appellant has accordingly claimed re-credit in credit account.
The tribunal has held that no tax is leviable on amounts received from BCCI by cricket associations, towards such similar assistance/expense reimbursements etc. for participating/ hosting cricket tournaments. He argued that since there was no tax payable on receipt of the capital equipment from BCCI by the appellant there is no question of any ‘short payment/ non-payment’ in discharging service tax at all. Consequently, the demand should be dropped.
Case Details
Case Title: Baroda Cricket Association Versus Commissioner of C.E. & S.T.-Vadodara-I
Case No.: Service Tax Appeal No. 12158 of 2019 – DB
Date: 26.11.2024
Counsel For Appellant: Saurabh Dixit
Counsel For Respondent: Ajay Kumar Samota
