AIRCEL CELLULAR LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TWO appeals filed by two different parties are being considered in this proceeding.

(2.) These appeals are arising from different orders of different authorities but involving common issues and therefore these appeals have been taken together for disposal. With the consent of both sides, the appeals itself are taken up for disposal after dispensing with requirement of pre -deposit for both the appeals.

(3.) IN respect of the second issue, the counsel for appellant explains that in Tamil Nadu, Chennai is one Telecom Circle and the rest of Chennai is another Telecom Circle as far as the mobile services are concerned. There have been occasions, when the appellant sold SIM cards and recharge coupons of Aircel Ltd., Coimbatore. On such sales, the Service Tax is paid on the cards and re -charges coupons by Aircel Ltd. Before release through the appellant or its dealers. He contests that in respect of these amounts the service is provided by Air Cell Ltd. and Service Tax also is paid by them and there cannot be any additional liability. He fairly submits that there is reciprocal arrangement for SIM cards and recharge coupons of appellants sold by Air Cell Ltd. and the amounts to be paid by one company to another is netted against reverse payments due. But this factor is not going to result in any short payment of tax. Therefore, demanding Service Tax once again would amount to duplication. He submits that identical demand for the subsequent period has been dropped by the Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai vide OIO dated 20 -11 -2011 which has not been appealed against by Revenue.