2024 (7) TMI 447 - HC - Service Tax

Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy - Levy of service tax - service provided by the petitioner as a part of sovereign functions of the Government of Tamil Nadu - HELD THAT - The issue is no longer res integra and is covered by the Circular No.89/7/2006-S.T., dated 18.12.2006 issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs, wherein, it has been clarified ' such an activity performed by a sovereign/public authority under the provisions of law does not constitute provision of taxable service to a person and, therefore, no service tax is leviable on such activities.' This Writ Petition is disposed off by giving liberty to the petitioner to file statutory appeal before the Customs, Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai, within a period of 60 days from today, without awaiting for the certified copy of this order.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to Order-in-Appeal dismissing appeal against Order-in-Original regarding service tax on transportation services provided by police department.

Analysis:
The Writ Petition challenges the Order-in-Appeal dismissing the appeal against the Order-in-Original related to the levy of service tax on services provided by the police department for transporting cash from chest to ATM centers. The dispute revolves around whether such services provided by the police department as part of sovereign functions are subject to service tax. The petitioner argues that Circular No.89/7/2006-S.T. clarifies that activities performed by sovereign/public authorities under the provision of law, which are statutory obligations, do not constitute taxable services for the purpose of service tax levy. The petitioner cites various tribunal decisions favoring police departments in similar cases to support their argument.

The petitioner contends that the impugned Order-in-Appeal should be set aside based on the precedents set by tribunal decisions in favor of police departments in similar circumstances. However, the Standing Counsel for the respondents argues that the Writ Petition should be dismissed due to the existence of an alternate remedy. The court acknowledges that the issue seems to favor the petitioner based on tribunal decisions but refrains from deciding the matter outright, emphasizing the need for the petitioner to pursue the statutory appeal process before the appropriate forum.

The court decides to dispose of the Writ Petition by granting the petitioner the liberty to file a statutory appeal before the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) within 60 days without waiting for the certified copy of the order. The CESTAT is directed to entertain and decide on the appeal based on its merits and in accordance with the law, considering the tribunal decisions cited by the petitioner. The court emphasizes expeditious handling of the appeal by the CESTAT. Consequently, the Writ Petition is disposed of with no costs, and connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.