9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 182X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... X, LUCKNOW [ 2018 (9) TMI 1918 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD] - Both sides have agreed that the issue involved in the present proceedings which are for the financial year 2012-13 are squarely covered by the said case M/S. FEDERAL SECURITY PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE SERVICE TAX, LUCKNOW [ 2018 (9) TMI 1918 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD] where it was held that providing of cash van service with security guard is covered under cash van service‟ and cannot be termed as security services‟ as the dominant service is transportation of cash from one place to another through these cash vans. Therefore, the appellants are not liable to pay differential Service Tax under the category of security service‟. Appeal allowed - de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from the appellant, it was stated that appellant was required to show cause as to why service tax of around ₹ 81 lakhs should not be demanded from them for the financial year 2012-13 on the basis of difference between the figures reflected in the balance sheet and those on which service tax was already paid by the appellant and service tax payable against recovery from old debtors. The said show cause notice was adjudicated through Order-in-Original dated 21.03.2017 wherein the demand was confirmed and penalty of around ₹ 8 lakhs was imposed on the appellant. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant preferred appeal before Commissioner (Appeals). Learned Commissioner (Appeals) through the impugned Order-in-Appeal upheld the said O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ke of ready reference, we reproduce relevant part of the said Final Order dated 19.09.2018:- 2. In all the appeals the facts and issues are common. The fact of the case are that the appellants are engaged in providing security services to the bank as well as cash van to the bank for carrying cash from one place to another. On 07.01.2010 officers of Central Excise visited the office premises of the appellant and carried out investigations. On the basis of the investigations it appeared to Revenue that appellants were showing excess figure of receipt in their bank statement as well as in their profit and loss account and balance sheet whereas they have shown lesser figures in their ST-3 returns. Therefore the differential amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding cash van to the banks for transporting the cash from one place to another place. Admittedly, the cash vans are having the security guards but the dominant service is to provide cash van for transportation of cash from one place to another. Admittedly, in this case, the main service provided by the appellant is cash van service. Whether this service shall do qualify as Security Service or Supply of Cash Van Service . A similar issue has been decided by this Tribunal in the case of Kingfisher Airlines Ltd. v. Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai- reported in 2015 (40) S.T.R. 1159 (Tri.- Mumbai), wherein Service Tax sought to be recovered from the Kingfisher Airlines on excess baggage charges. In the said case, the issue was whether the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
