2009 (11) TMI 238

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... S.C. and S.K. Mishra, for the Respondent. [Order].- By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner who is providing service by way of security guards to B.S.N.L., Gorakhpur, have sought a direction to the respondents to pay entire service tax along with 18% interest and penalty to the petitioners, which is payable to Central Excise, Division Gorakhpur as demanded by Central Excise Departme .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... upto 30th June, 2000. 3. The petitioner was served with notice issued by Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise and Service Tax Board, Gorakhpur to appear in person, if so desired, and pay the service tax for the period of April, 1999 to June, 2000 amounting to Rs.93,510/- as service tax. The petitioners asked the B.S.N.L. authorities to pay the said amount to them so that the service tax as dema .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the respondents No.1, 2 and 4 are insisting by that letter that first service tax should be deposited by the petitioner with the Central Excise Department and, only thereafter the amount of service tax will be paid by the BSNL to the petitioner, who is providing security service to the BSNL. 7. This kind of a precondition does not appear to be justified. Therefore, as interim direction is issued .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the petitioner. For ready reference, paragraph-12 of the counter affidavit is reproduced below: 12. That the content of para 14 of the writ petition are not correct as stated hence denied. It is stated that though the respondent are liable to pay the service tax and are always ready to pay it but it could not be paid directly to petitioner due to the reason as stated in above para. In fact the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mount with the Central Excise Department. 15. So far as, penalty notice issued by the Central Excise Department is concerned, we find that the petitioner was prevented by sufficient cause in not depositing the service tax in time. 16. In view of the above, we set aside the penalty notice issued to the petitioner. Consequently, the penalty proceedings are quashed.
Case laws, Decisions, Judgem .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X