Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
The Superintendent Of Police vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 25 April, 2014
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SOUTH ZONAL BENCH BANGALORE Final Order No. 20619 / 2014 Application(s) Involved: ST/Stay/29051/2013 in ST/28363/2013-DB Appeal(s) Involved: ST/28363/2013-DB [Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. MYS-EXCUS-000-DIVV-APP-HAB-020-13-14 dated 04/09/2013 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), MYSORE] The Superintendent of Police, Mysore Dist., Jalpuri, MYSORE - 570011 Appellant(s) Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Mysore S1-S2, VINAYA MARGA, SIDDHARTHA NAGAR, MYSORE - 570011 Respondent(s)
Appearance:
Mr. S.K. Venugopala Rao, C.A. For Appellant Mr. S. Teli, A.R. For Respondent CORAM:
HON'BLE SHRI B.S.V. MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER HON'BLE SHRI S.K. MOHANTY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ________________________________________ Date of Hearing: 25/04/2014 Date of Decision: 25/04/2014 Per B.S.V. MURTHY The issue involved is whether the Security Services provided by Karnataka State Police Department to Baba Atomic Research Centre is liable to service tax or not.
2. After hearing both sides for considerable time, what emerged the fact that the appellant did not contest the liability of service tax according to both the lower authorities and therefore, both of them dealt with the issue relating to interest and penalty only. Further, it is also found that on the issue of limitation which was raised before the Commissioner (Appeals), there is no finding. The appellants have discharged the entire amount of service tax and only interest is pending. The issue was not contested before the lower authorities and there was no proper representation on behalf of the appellant and in view of the fact that the appellants department felt that if they pay service tax, the matter will be closed and need not to pay interest, they have taken the issue very lightly. In these circumstances, we consider it appropriate that the matter should go back to the original adjudicating authority once again so that the appellant would get another opportunity to present their case in detail and make their submissions and enable a well considered decision by the lower authority. Accordingly, the appeal itself is decided by way of remand to the original adjudicating authority with a request to decide the matter afresh after giving reasonable opportunity to the appellant to present their case.
(Operative portion of the order has been pronounced in open court) (S.K. MOHANTY) JUDICIAL MEMBER (B.S.V. MURTHY) TECHNICAL MEMBER /vc/