w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Candid Security Services V/S CCE & ST, Raipur


Company & Directors' Information:- SECURITY CO LTD [Active] CIN = L65929WB1948PLC016992

Company & Directors' Information:- V N A SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74920DL1998PTC091780

Company & Directors' Information:- G SECURITY (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74920MH2004PTC150235

Company & Directors' Information:- S R SECURITY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74920MH2005PTC152956

Company & Directors' Information:- S R SECURITY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74110MH2005PTC152956

Company & Directors' Information:- J S SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74920HR2008PTC037747

Company & Directors' Information:- B D SECURITY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74920JK2006PTC002638

Company & Directors' Information:- R. P. S. S. SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U93090UP2017PTC092692

Company & Directors' Information:- G I SECURITY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74140WB1993PTC057724

Company & Directors' Information:- L K SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U93030UP2015PTC068449

Company & Directors' Information:- S. B. SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999UP2016PTC086112

Company & Directors' Information:- R M G SECURITY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74910TN1997PTC038969

Company & Directors' Information:- G D A SECURITY PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U74899DL1973PTC006424

Company & Directors' Information:- H K SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74920MH2002PTC136385

Company & Directors' Information:- A G SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74900MH2013PTC239505

Company & Directors' Information:- P G SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U24232DL2005PTC132138

Company & Directors' Information:- M & D SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74120DL2008PTC173377

Company & Directors' Information:- J S D SECURITY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74920DL2009PTC197167

Company & Directors' Information:- M. SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74920WB2000PTC092218

Company & Directors' Information:- D & G SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U93000WB2011PTC165782

Company & Directors' Information:- D AND R SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74920JH2013PTC001793

Company & Directors' Information:- S M SECURITY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74899DL1996PTC007805

Company & Directors' Information:- J AND J SECURITY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74920DL2004PTC128735

Company & Directors' Information:- E-1 SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74910OR2012PTC014996

Company & Directors' Information:- J S S SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74920PB2005PTC028528

Company & Directors' Information:- W B SECURITY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74920RJ2012PTC040905

Company & Directors' Information:- R. D. SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74920PN2010PTC135994

Company & Directors' Information:- K N R SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U93000MH2010PTC204385

Company & Directors' Information:- S P SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U93000PN2014PTC150722

Company & Directors' Information:- G T I SECURITY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999MH2013PTC251541

Company & Directors' Information:- J. B. C. SECURITY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999MH2017PTC302126

Company & Directors' Information:- R P SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74120UP2011PTC046112

Company & Directors' Information:- S. P. S. S. SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74120UP2016PTC076893

Company & Directors' Information:- H N S SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74900TG2013PTC089837

Company & Directors' Information:- P. S. SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74920UP2008PTC035914

Company & Directors' Information:- B J U SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74920UP2010PTC039772

Company & Directors' Information:- S A SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U93000UP2014PTC062073

Company & Directors' Information:- B. R. S. SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U93030UP2013PTC059573

Company & Directors' Information:- B & I SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74900WB2013PTC190717

Company & Directors' Information:- R L SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999JK2015PTC004376

Company & Directors' Information:- S R S SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U95000DL2000PTC106902

Company & Directors' Information:- G G SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U00000DL2001PTC109868

Company & Directors' Information:- M R S SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74140DL2013PTC247541

Company & Directors' Information:- S M SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74999DL2004PTC125744

Company & Directors' Information:- T & E SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74999DL2011PTC220586

Company & Directors' Information:- AT SECURITY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74999DL2012PTC234962

Company & Directors' Information:- R SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U93000DL2011PTC213180

Company & Directors' Information:- L N T SECURITY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74899DL2001PTC109776

Company & Directors' Information:- A.N.D SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74900DL2009PTC193787

Company & Directors' Information:- M K G SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Under Process of Striking Off] CIN = U74920DL2005PTC141445

Company & Directors' Information:- A V SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74920DL2008PTC181601

Company & Directors' Information:- R-4 SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74920DL2001PTC113509

Company & Directors' Information:- S O L SECURITY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74920DL2002PTC115968

Company & Directors' Information:- V AND A SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74920DL2004PTC125411

Company & Directors' Information:- H S SECURITY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74920DL2004PTC127249

Company & Directors' Information:- T F SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74920DL2005PTC143337

Company & Directors' Information:- M P S SECURITY PRIVATE LIMITED [Under Process of Striking Off] CIN = U74920DL2007PTC169952

Company & Directors' Information:- V M SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74920DL2008PTC185522

Company & Directors' Information:- N K SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74920DL2009PTC191230

Company & Directors' Information:- M H SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74920DL2013PTC255582

Company & Directors' Information:- P & D SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74920HR2013PTC048169

Company & Directors' Information:- P T SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U67120KA2013PTC070724

Company & Directors' Information:- H S R SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74920KA2012PTC064955

Company & Directors' Information:- M AND G SECURITY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74920HR2020PTC087465

Company & Directors' Information:- SECURITY & SERVICES (INDIA) PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U74140WB1977PTC030902

Company & Directors' Information:- I S S SECURITY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74920DL2000PTC103574

Company & Directors' Information:- N R V SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74920CH2007PTC030824

Company & Directors' Information:- S V M SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U93090DL2006PTC153793

Company & Directors' Information:- R A R SECURITY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74920DL2006PTC154147

    Service Tax Appeal No. 55381 of 2014 [Arising out of the Order-in-Original No. Commissioner/RPR/ST/122/2013 dated 30/12/2013 passed by The Commissioner, Central Excise, Raipur] and Final Order No. 52100/2018

    Decided On, 24 May 2018

    At, Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi

    By, THE HONORABLE JUSTICE: ANIL CHOUDHARY
    By, MEMBER AND THE HONORABLE JUSTICE: C.L. MAHAR
    By, MEMBER

    For Petitioner: K. Vaish, Advocate And For Respondents: G.R. Singh, Authorized Representative (DR)



Judgment Text


1. The appellant is a security service agency (proprietary concern) providing security services under that two Commissionerate of Raipur and Bhopal, where they are separately registered. The issue in this appeal is whether impugned adjudication order passed by Commissioner, Raipur which also determines liability for their office at Nowrozabad within Bhopal jurisdiction, whether the demand to that extent is without jurisdiction, whether the appellant is entitled to cum tax benefit, whether the appellant is entitled to adjustment of the taxable value on receipt basis, as the demand pertains to the period prior to 01/04/2011 and further if penalty rightly is imposed under Sections 76, 77, 78 as well as late filing fee for returns under Rule 7C of Service Tax Rules, 1994.

2. Consequent to the investigations conducted by the Central Preventive by Raipur Commissionerate, show cause notice dated 18/10/2012 was issued invoking the extended period of limitation for the period 2007 - 2008 to 2010 - 2011 on the basis of consolidated figures shown in the balance-sheet. The liability of the appellant was worked out for service tax at Rs. 1,24,87,581/- with proposal to adjust the amount already paid Rs. 42,45,300/-, thus demanding service tax short paid at Rs. 82,42,283/-.

3. The show cause notice was adjudicated on contest confirming the proposed demand and short paid duty of Rs. 82,42,283/-. Further allowing adjustment of Rs. 30,69,516/- being the tax paid by the appellant with respect to their services provided under Bhopal Commissionerate, relating to the Nowrozabad office. Further, penalty was also imposed under Section 76 at the rate of Rs. 200/- per day or 2% of such tax, per month, whichever is higher, under Section 77, Rs. 10,000/- under Section 78, Rs. 51,72,767/- and further under Rule 7C of Service Tax Rules for late filing of returns Rs. 80,000/- was imposed being amount of Rs. 20,000/- for default of each return for the 4 returns, during the period in question.

4. Being aggrieved the appellant is before this Tribunal. The learned Counsel urges that it is admitted fact that the appellant have got work in two different states namely M.P., and Raipur, Chhattisgarh and they are separately registered and making compliance separately in the two states, which fall under different Commissionerate. As the show cause notice is issued by the Commissionerate at Raipur, the demand with respect to their services provided under the Bhopal Commissionerate, M.P. is wholly without jurisdiction, and the same is fit to be set aside. It is further contended that up to the period March 2011, service tax was leviable on the basis of receipt towards the services provided and not on billing basis or mercantile basis. The adjudication order erred in demanding service tax on the mercantile basis or billing basis. Secondly it is contended that the gross amount booked by the Revenue from the profit and loss account of the appellant, was the consolidated figure for both the units under Bhopal Commissionerate and under Raipur Commissionerate, being a proprietorship concern. The said gross amount included the element of service tax also charged in the bills. Accordingly the appellant is entitled for cum-tax benefit.

5. Lastly the Learned Counsel states that the appellant have disclosed the proper accounts maintained in regular course of business, and also disclosed the amount of gross billing, the receipts, the outstanding/sundry debtors, etc. in their final accounts being profit and loss account and balance sheet, which are duly audited by chartered accountant. The appellant have also reflected the amount of service tax payable on the liability side in the balance-sheet. That there is no case of suppression of facts from the Revenue. Further it is admitted fact that the whole demand is based on the records maintained by the appellant. In this view of the matter the Learned Counsel prays that penalty imposed under Section 78 is fit to be set-aside. So far as the penalty under Section 76 is concerned, the learned Counsel states that it is evident from the balance-sheet as on 31st of March each year, during the period in question, that there were heavy sundry debtors, mainly receivable from South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd. - a PSU, which was the main reason for their financial crisis, which has resulted in delay in deposit of service tax. In this view of the matter there is no deliberate default in payment of service tax liability. Accordingly the penalty under Section 76 is also fit to be set aside, there being a reasonable cause. So far penalty under Section 77 is concerned, the learned Counsel stated that there is no conscious violation of the provisions of this Act, nor non-compliance of any of the notices, the penalty may be set aside. As far as late fee imposed under Rule 7C of Service Tax Rules @ Rs. 20,000/- per return, the learned Counsel states that the same is highly excessive under the facts and circumstances and accordingly prays for reducing the said penalty of late fine.

6. The learned AR for Revenue Shri G.R. Singh, relies on the impugned order. He further points out from the findings in the impugned order and states that appellant had not taken up the issue of jurisdiction before the Adjudicating Authority. Secondly, in the show cause notice, where the service tax demand had been calculated, it is mentioned that service tax payable (as per actual security service receipts). Accordingly it is apparent that Revenue have given sufficient consideration towards the tax payable on receipt basis.

7. Having considered the rival contentions, we find that so far the demand raised in the impugned order relating to Bhopal Commissionerate, of the Amlai office of the appellant, in respect of services in the state of M.P. is concerned, the said demand hit for jurisdiction, and accordingly set aside. As regards the claim for cum-tax benefit, we are satisfied that the gross amount taken by Revenue for raising the demand, in the facts and circumstances, the element of services tax was included and accordingly we hold that the appellant is entitled to cum-tax benefit for calculation of service tax liability. So far the claim of the appellant is concerned, as regards reworking of the taxable value on the receipt basis, we are satisfied that tax demanded on gross value of bill raised, during the financial year, which is apparently erroneous, as tax was required to be demanded and/or calculated on receipt basis, as per applicable law till 31/03/2011. Accordingly, we set aside the gross demand raised and remand the matter to the Original Adjudicating Authority for recalculation of demand on receipt basis with respect to the services provided under the Raipur Commissionerate. As regards the penalties imposed, we find that there is no case for deliberate default on the part of the appellant as they have disclosed their turnover and liability towards service tax in their balance-sheet. On query from the bench as to why the returns for about two years were in arrears and not filed, the learned Counsel have explained that the website of the Department - ACES, does not accept filing of the return unless the service tax payable as per return have been deposited. Further the learned Counsel demonstrated that due to heavy sundry debtors and/or amount receivable for services rendered and/or bills raised on the receiver of service, a PSU, have led to financial crisis and/or shortage of funds in the hands of the appellant, resulting into default in payment of tax, but there is no deliberate default. Further there is no case by Revenue that there has been diversion of funds from the business of the appellant for non-business use. Accordingly we find that there is reasonable cause for default and as su

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

ch we set aside the penalty under Section 78 as well as under Section 76 of the Finance Act. So far the other penalties are concerned under Section 77 and under Rule 7C of Service Tax Rules, these are set aside and remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for reconsideration upon redetermination of liability in accordance with law. We also make it clear that under the facts and circumstances, the demand for extended period is chargeable, as we have set aside the penalty only on the ground of their being genuine reason for non-payment of service tax demand. 8. Accordingly this appeal is allowed in part and remanded in part. The appellant is also directed to appear before the Original Adjudicating Authority within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of this order and seek an opportunity of hearing and also submit the copies of relevant documents.
O R