SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(SC) 524

RUMA PAL, ARIJIT PASAYAT, C.K.THAKKER
Star India (P) LTD. – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai & Goa – Respondent


Order

CA No. 5072 of 2004 and CA No. 5276 of 2004

1. The appellant does not press these appeals. The appeals are accordingly, dismissed for non-prosecution.

CA Nos. 5399 and 5400 of 2004

2. The appellant is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and carries on business in India. It is the agent of M/s Satellite Television Asian Region Limited, Hong Kong (referred to as “STAR”, Hong Kong). The business of STAR is to telecast channels from satellites situated outside India. Some of the channels are available and enjoyed by customers in India. According to the appellant, it does no broadcasting but merely sells time-slots for advertisement and obtains sponsors for serials, programmes or live events, etc. Thus, when the service of broadcasting was introduced in the Finance Act, 1994 as a taxable service, with effect from 16.7.2001 by the Finance Act, 2001, the appellant disputed its liability to make any payment of service tax on the ground that it did not, in fact, broadcast.

3. The Commissioner, however, held against the appellant. The appellant appealed before the Commissioner (Appeals). While the appeal was pending, the Finance Act, 2001 was amended by the Finance Act, 200











Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top