9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 483X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unsel ORDER The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition for issuance of a Writ of Declaration and Mandamus to i. call for the records pertaining to the impugned Order-in- Original No.MAD-CEX-000-JTC-23-13 dated 30.09.2013 passed by the third respondent Joint Commissioner, O/o. Commissioner of Central Excise, Madurai and the consequential letter dated 29.08.2022 issued by the second respondent to the fifth respondent; ii. quash the same; iii. declare that the activities of the petitioner are outside the purview of the Union levy of Service Tax as that of the Security Agencies Service; and iv. direct the first respondent to issue suitable instructions to his subordinate officers not to propose, demand and/or levy service tax on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by Private parties such as Pothis, Lalitha Jewellery etc. 11.2. In view of the above legal provisions of the Act pertaining to the Security Agency Service and details received from Dindigul Police, I find that the Security Service provided by the Dindigul Police to various private/commercial agencies for a consideration would clearly falls under the taxable category of "Security Agency Services as defined under Section 65(105)(w) of the Act and hence the entire amount collected by them as consideration for provision of the above service fall under the ambit of Service Tax 11.3. I find that the Dindigul Police have furnished the above details of amount collected towards providing security/bandobust service, cash escort service/Guard ser ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 12.2. Further, the Dindigul Police in their written reply vide letter stated above, have claimed that since the amount received by them towards rendering taxable service during the impugned period was Rs. 7,30,060/- only, which is below the threshold exemption limit provided vide Notification No. 06/2005-ST dt. 01.04.2005, the question of remitting service tax would not arise. They have relied on the Order-in-Appeal No.94/2013-ST dt 26.04.2013 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Salem and stated that the O-I-A passed by the said Appealate authority would be applicable to them also since the matter is one and the same. I have carefully gone through the relevant Order-in Appeal and I find that the Dindigul Police are not eligible to get bene ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... foregoing. I hold that an amount of Rs. 89,468/- towards service tax liability on the charges received by the Dindigul Police towards the security services rendered during the period from 01.04.2011 to 31 12.2012 under proviso to Section 73(1) of the Act is demandable from them with interest at appropriate rate on the said amount under section 75 of the Act. I also hold that the Dindigul Police have failed to pay service tax on taxable service provided by them during the impugned period and thereby contravened the provisions of Section 68 of the Act read with Rule 6 of the Rule and made them liable for penal action under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994; that the Dindigul Police have failed to register themselves with the department and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der for the petitioner would also submit that the issue is also covered by CBEC Circular No. 89/07/2006-ST dated 18.12.2006, as per which, the charges recovered by any sovereign or public authority for carrying out any statutory function will not be liable to service tax if three conditions prescribed thereon are satisfied. 7. The learned Special Government Pleader for the petitioner would also place reliance on the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Mcleod Russel (India) Ltd. Vs. Union of India, 2015 (39) S.T.R. 8 (Cal). That apart, the learned Special Government Pleader for the petitioner has relied on the following decisions of the Tribunals:- i. Superintendent of Police, Swai Madhopur Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur, d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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. 12. If such appeal is filed with the web copy of this order, the CESTAT, Chennai shall entertain the appeal and dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law. Needless to state, before passing the order, the Tribunal may examine the above decisions of the Tribunal cited by the learned Special Government Pleader for the petitioner and pass orders on merits, on its turn, as expeditiously as possible. 13. Recovery proceedings, if any initiated, is directed to be lifted. In case the petitioner fails to file such appeal before the CESTAT, Chennai, within t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
