9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (4) TMI 1538 - AT - Service TaxNon-payment of service tax - Security Agency service - Rent-a-Cab Scheme Operator Service - period 2001-2002 to 2005-2006 - Commercial concern versus non profit concern - Adjudicating Authority has taken the view that no Service Tax is liable to be paid since the Respondent Agency is not formed with a profit motive - HELD THAT - The issue decided in the case of PUNJAB EX-SERVICEMEN CORPORATION VERSUS UNION OF INDIA 2010 (9) TMI 871 - PUNJAB HARYANA HIGH COURT where it was held that As per definition of security agency under Section 65(94) service provider should be engaged in the business rendering specified service. There is no warrant for reading therein requirement of profit motive. Thus, the respondent will be liable to payment of Service Tax along with interest under the category of Security Agency Service - however, the respondent deserves the benefit of waiving of penalty subjected to the condition that the Service Tax is paid along with interest - appeal allowed in part.
Issues:
1. Revenue's appeal against dropping of Service Tax demand by Adjudicating Authority. Analysis: The appeal filed by the Revenue pertains to a case where the Respondent, engaged in providing 'Security Agency' services, was found not liable to pay Service Tax by the Adjudicating Authority. The Revenue challenged this decision based on the argument that profit motive is not a prerequisite for the liability to pay Service Tax under the category of 'Security Agency Service'. The Adjudicating Authority had dropped the demand for Service Tax, considering the Respondent as a charitable entity without a profit motive. The Revenue contended that the Respondent falls under the definition of a 'security agency' as per Section 65(94) during the disputed period, citing a relevant decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The High Court's decision emphasized that the term 'business' in the definition of 'security agency' does not mandate a profit motive for the service provider. The Revenue argued that the Respondent should be liable to pay Service Tax under the 'Security Agency' category. Upon careful consideration of the arguments and legal provisions, the Appellate Tribunal found that the Respondent indeed provided 'Security Agency Service' as defined under Section 65(94). The Tribunal agreed with the High Court's interpretation that the term 'business' in the definition of 'security agency' does not necessitate a profit motive. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the Adjudicating Authority's decision and held that the Respondent is liable to pay Service Tax under the 'Security Agency Service' category. However, the Tribunal granted the Respondent the benefit of waiving the penalty, subject to the condition that the Service Tax is paid along with interest. In conclusion, the Revenue's appeal was partly allowed, overturning the Adjudicating Authority's decision to drop the Service Tax demand on the grounds of the Respondent's charitable nature without a profit motive. The Tribunal's decision clarified that profit motive is not a prerequisite for the liability to pay Service Tax under the 'Security Agency Service' category, as per the relevant legal provisions and judicial interpretations.
|
