9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 119X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ambit of the tax liability with respect to manpower recruitment and supply agency service the use of word any person in the afore mentioned definitions is sufficient to form the above opinion. Hence, the argument of the appellant that they being a welfare organisation working upon no profit fundamental may be exempted from Service Tax liability for providing the manpower services is not sustainable in the eyes of the laws. No benefit in terms of said argument can be extended in favour of the appellants. Extended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- There is nothing brought on record by the appellants to falsify the said presumption. It is also apparent from record that the appellants Society has received gross value amounting to ₹ 110410414/- for various service receivers against the impugned service provided by them. Accordingly their tax liability was ₹ 12617613/-. However, from the documents resumed, it was observed by the Department that liability only for an amount of ₹ 1100940 has been discharged by the appellants Society and they are still liable to pay an amount of ₹ 11516673/-. These observations which have nowhere been denied by the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lows:- That the appellant is registered and engaged in rendering services covered under the category of Man-power Recruitment and Supply Agency / Security/ Detective Agency Service. Based upon an intelligence gathered from a service receiver, the Department came to know that despite providing the taxable service of Man-power Recruitment and Supply Agency Services, the appellants were neither paying the due Service Tax nor were filing the ST 3 Returns. Accordingly, the appellants were called upon vide summons of September and November 2014 to provide the documents. The appellants neither replied nor provided the documents. Summons dated 7th January, 2015 was served upon to all the appellants requiring them to appear for their statements on 9th January, 2015 but none appeared. Fresh summons were issued to appear on 19th January, 2015 when all the appellants appeared. The premises, accordingly, were searched on 7th January, 2015 and the requisite record was resumed under Panchnama of the even date. The statements of all the appellants Shri Sohan Lal Dhaka, the President of M/s.Sikar Ex-Serviceman Welfare Co-operative Society Ltd. (hereinafter referred as Society ), Shri Ram Kris ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s rendered to Kendriya Vidhyalayas. Ld. Counsel has impressed upon submitting that adjudicating authority below has ignored these submissions. Hence, the demand confirmed is not legally sustainable. Order under challenge is, therefore, prayed to be set aside and appeal is prayed to be allowed. 4. While rebutting these arguments, learned Departmental Representative has placed reliance upon para 24.2 of the Order-in-Original as far as the submissions about the suppression of facts is concerned wherein it has been held that since the appellants have withheld the required information and have also failed to file the ST-3 Returns, the appellant cannot take plea of no malafide and no suppression of facts on their part. The extended time limit for issuing Show Cause Notice is very much available with the Department. Learned D.R. has also emphasised upon para No.3 of the Order under challenge, wherein it has clearly been observed that despite taking registration under Service Tax the appellants were neither paying the due service tax nor were filing ST-3 Returns. It is impressed upon that the demand in order under challenge has been confirmed based upon the aforesaid observations as suc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent while issuing the impugned Show Cause Notice of the year 2015 raising a demand for the year 2009-2014. We observe that the appellants Society was admittedly registered under service tax since the year 2004. Admittedly, no ST-3 return was ever filed by the appellant Society. Both these admissions are sufficient for us to hold that there was sufficient knowledge with the appellants about their liability to pay Service Tax as received by them for providing the taxable service of manpower recruitment and service agency. The non-filing of ST-3 Return and non-payment of the service tax so collected from the receivers definitely amounts to suppression of the relevant fact on part of the appellants. There can be no other motive than evasion of tax liability for the said suppression. There is nothing brought on record by the appellants to falsify the said presumption. It is also apparent from record that the appellants Society has received gross value amounting to ₹ 110410414/- for various service receivers against the impugned service provided by them. Accordingly their tax liability was ₹ 12617613/-. However, from the documents resumed, it was observed by the Department th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eged against the Society. We draw our support from the case law in the case of Anil Kumar Mahensaria vs. Commissioner of Customs reported in 2008 (228) ELT 166 (Delhi) wherein it was held that only one set of penalty can be imposed either on the appellant or upon his proprietorship firm. 10. In view of entire above discussion, we summarise the findings as follows:- The appellant have admitted their omission for not paying the Service Tax despite they being registered under Service Tax. The services rendered by them being taxable in nature, we hold that the demand has rightly been confirmed by the adjudicating authority below. However, for the demand of ₹ 1.12 Lakh qua the services being rendered to the Kendriya Vidhyalays, we extend the benefit of the Notification No.25/2012 dated 20.06.2012 in favour of appellant and do hereby set aside the said demand. Penalty upon the appellants Society has also been upheld. However the penalties upon the office bearers thereof are held not sustainable and are hereby set aside. 11. In view of these findings the order under challenge stands modified to the above extent. Consequent thereto, all the appeals stand partly allowed. [ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
