9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 182X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts were engaged in providing 'Security Services' to the bank as well as they were engaged in providing cash van to the Bank for carrying cash from one place to another. The appellant were issued with a show cause noticed dated 14.10.2015 wherein it was stated that the said show cause notice was statement of demand-cum-show cause notice and it was stated that in continuation to earlier demand-cum show cause notice dated 23.12.2013 for the period 2011-12 since the grounds relied upon are the same and therefore the said statement of demand dated 14.10.2015 in the form of statement of demand-cum-show cause notice was issued. It was further stated in the said demand-cum-show cause notice that on the basis of earlier show cause notice for the per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of this Tribunal for earlier period passed through Final Order Nos.72386-72388/2018 dated 19.09.2018. 4. We have considered the submissions made by both the sides and perused said Final Order Nos.72386-72388/2018 dated 19.09.2018. We note that the proceedings initiated through show cause notice dated 23.12.2013 issued for the period 2011-12 ultimately reached this Tribunal and the same were considered along with two other proceedings initiated against the same appellant for the financial year 2006-07 to 2010-11 and all the three appeals were decided through a common Final Order Nos.72386-72388/2018 dated 19.09.2018. Both sides have agreed that the issue involved in the present proceedings which are for the financial year 2012-13 are s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... est. Further various penalties were imposed. Aggrieved by the said orders appellant is before this Tribunal. 3. After hearing both sides duly represented by Shri Vineet Kumar Singh, ld. Advocate and Shri Rajeev Ranjan, ld. Addl. Commr. (A.R.) we find that the issue is no more res integra in view of the decision of this Tribunal through Final Order No.71780-70782/2018 dated 27.07.2018. Both the sides agreed that the issue is squarely covered by the decision vide Final Order dated 27.07.2018. For the sake of appreciation, the findings in the said Final Order dated 27.07.2018 are reproduced below:- "6. We have gone through the agreements between the appellants and the banks. As per the agreement, which is produced before us, the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the dominant service is transportation of cash from one place to another through these cash vans. Therefore, we hold that the appellants are not liable to pay differential Service Tax under the category of 'security service'. Consequently, no penalty is imposable. 8. In these terms, we set aside the impugned orders and allow the appeals with consequential relief, if any." 4. Following the precedent decision of this Tribunal we hold that the impugned orders are not sustainable. We therefore allow all the three appeals. The appellants shall be entitled for consequential relief." 5. By following our earlier decision, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal. The appellant shall be entitled for consequential relief, as pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
