CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH REGIONAL BENCH - COURT NO. I (1) Service Tax Appeal No. 61006 of 2018 [Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. LUD-EXCUS-001-APP-773-779-18 dated

23.03.2018 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central GST, Ludhiana]

Jannu Cable TV ……Appellant Suffian Road, Amarpura, Ludhiana, Punjab VERSUS Commissioner of Central Excise, Goods ……Respondent and Service Tax, Ludhiana GST Bhwan, F-Block, Rishi Nagar, Ludhiana, Punjab WITH (2) Service Tax Appeal No. 60288 of 2019 (M/s Bobby Cable TV vs. CGST, Ludhiana)

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. LUD-EXCUS-001-APP-1833-1836-18 dated

26.10.2018 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central GST, Ludhiana]

(3) Service Tax Appeal No. 60292 of 2019 (M/s DS Cable TV Network vs. CGST, Ludhiana)

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. LUD-EXCUS-001-APP-1833-1836-18 dated

26.10.2018 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central GST, Ludhiana]

(4) Service Tax Appeal No. 60490 of 2019 (M/s Sheikh Farid City Cable vs. CGST, Ludhiana)

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. LUD-EXCUS-001-APP-1866-1867-18 dated

05.11.2018 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central GST, Ludhiana]

APPEARANCE:

Ms. Kanika Malhotra, Advocate for the Appellants Shri Anurag Kumar and Shri Ram Niwas, Authorized Representatives for the Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. S. S. GARG, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) HON’BLE MR. P. ANJANI KUMAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

FINAL ORDER NO. 60171-60174/2026 DATE OF HEARING: 12.02.2026 DATE OF DECISION: 12.02.2026 S.S. GARG :

These four appeals are arising out of the different impugned orders, whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has confirmed the demand of service tax against the appellants for providing cable operator service. Since the issue involved in all these appeals is common, therefore, all the appeals are taken up together for the purpose of discussion and decisions.

2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in providing taxable services under the category of cable services through their cable network to various subscribers.

2.1 As per provisions of Section 65(105)(zs) (upto 30.06.2012) and under Section 66B of the Finance Act, 1994 (w.e.f. 01.07.2012), any service provided or to be provided to any person, by a cable operator in relation to cable service, is taxable and is subject to service tax. Also, as per Section 67 of the Act, service tax is chargeable on any taxable service with reference to its value which shall be the gross amount charged by the service provider for such service provided or to be provided by him. Notification No. 06/2005-ST dated 01.03.2005 upto 30.06.2012 and/or Notification No. 33/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012 (w.e.f. 01.07.2012) exempts taxable service of a specified aggregate value in any financial year from the whole of the service tax leviable thereon. However, it has been specifically provided in the said notification that nothing contained in this notification shall apply to taxable services provided by a person under a brand name, whether registered or not, of another person. The ‘brand name’ has been defined in the above mentioned notifications.

2.2 The appellants were found to be receiving branded cable services under the brand name/logo ‘FW’ from the multi system operator (‘MSO’) namely M/s FastWay Transmission Private Limited, Ludhiana. M/s FastWay used to receive the TV contents from TV channels/aggregators and used to supply these contents to local cable operators (‘LCO’) like the appellants. M/s FastWay entered into an agreement with the appellants for supply of TV contents against monetary considerations to be paid by the appellants. As per agreement, the appellants were re-transmitting the TV signals through cable received from M/s FastWay to their subscriber/consumer/ultimate user. The appellants were re- transmitting the TV signals received from M/s FastWay as it is, without any addition/modification and the name/logo ‘FW’ of M/s FastWay was continuously displayed during reception of TV programme by