Case Note & Summary
The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) filed four appeals against a common order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Mumbai, which had confirmed the demand for service tax on media rights granted to MSM Satellite (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. and World Sport Group (India) Pvt. Ltd. for telecast of Indian Premier League (IPL) matches. The show cause notices covered financial years 2007-08, 2008-09, 2010-11, and 2011-12, classifying BCCI as a 'Franchisee' under Section 65(47) of the Finance Act, 1994. BCCI contended that the services were 'export of services' under the Export of Services Rules, 2005, and thus not taxable. The Tribunal rejected this contention, holding that the transaction was not an export of service. Before the High Court, the revenue raised a preliminary objection that the appeal on taxability lies before the Supreme Court under Sections 35H and 35L of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The High Court, after hearing arguments, dismissed the appeals, effectively upholding the Tribunal's order and the service tax demand.
Headnote
A) Service Tax - Export of Services - Taxability - The issue was whether services provided by BCCI to foreign entities under media rights agreements for IPL telecast were export of services under Export of Services Rules, 2005. The Tribunal held that the transaction was not an export of service, and the High Court upheld this finding, dismissing the appeals. (Paras 1-5)
B) Service Tax - Maintainability of Appeal - Section 35H and 35L of Central Excise Act, 1944 - The respondent raised a preliminary objection that the appeal on taxability lies before the Supreme Court. The Court considered this objection but proceeded to dismiss the appeals on merits. (Para 5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the services rendered by BCCI under media rights agreements with foreign entities constitute 'export of services' and are thus not taxable under service tax.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeals, upholding the CESTAT order and the service tax demand.
Law Points
- Service tax
- Export of services
- Franchisee
- Finance Act 1994
- Central Excise Act 1944
- Maintainability of appeal
Case Details
2023 LawText (BOM) (08) 66
Central Excise Appeal No.192 of 2019, Central Excise Appeal No.193 of 2019, Central Excise Appeal No.194 of 2019, Central Excise Appeal No.195 of 2019
G. S. Kulkarni, Jitendra Jain
Mr. Sriram Sridharan for Appellant, Mr. Jitendra Mishra a/w Mr. Satyaprakash Sharma for Respondent
The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI)
Commissioner of Service Tax-1, Mumbai
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Appeals against CESTAT order confirming service tax demand on media rights agreements.
Remedy Sought
BCCI sought to set aside the CESTAT order and the underlying service tax demand.
Filing Reason
BCCI challenged the taxability of services rendered under media rights agreements with foreign entities, claiming they were export of services.
Previous Decisions
CESTAT rejected BCCI's appeals and confirmed the Order-in-Original passed by the Assessing Officer.
Issues
Whether the services provided by BCCI under media rights agreements constitute 'export of services' under Export of Services Rules, 2005.
Whether the appeals are maintainable before the High Court on the issue of taxability.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant (BCCI) argued that the services were export of services and not taxable.
Respondent (Revenue) raised preliminary objection that appeals on taxability lie before Supreme Court under Sections 35H and 35L of Central Excise Act, 1944.
Ratio Decidendi
The services rendered by BCCI under media rights agreements with foreign entities were not 'export of services' under the Export of Services Rules, 2005, and thus were taxable under service tax.
Judgment Excerpts
The Tribunal has held that the transaction was not a transaction of export of service.
We had taken up these appeals for hearing when Mr.Mishra on behalf of the respondent/revenue has raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of these appeals before this Court, contending that the issue raised in these appeals, is in regard to determination of taxability of the services for the purpose of assessment.
Procedural History
Show cause notices were issued to BCCI for FY 2007-08, 2008-09, 2010-11, and 2011-12. The Assessing Officer passed orders confirming service tax demand. BCCI appealed to CESTAT, which rejected the appeals on 10th December 2018. BCCI then filed four appeals before the Bombay High Court, which were dismissed on 1st August 2023.
Acts & Sections
- Finance Act, 1994: Section 65(47)
- Central Excise Act, 1944: Section 35H, Section 35L
- Export of Services Rules, 2005: Rule 3(1)
