Settlement application rejected for Service Tax evasion due to untimely filing post-adjudication.

The Settlement Commission rejected the settlement application by M/s. Vishal Security Force for evasion of Service Tax due to untimely filing post-adjudication. The Commission held that the application should have been submitted before the adjudication order was dispatched, citing Section 32E(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Evasion of Service Tax by M/s. Vishal Security Force (VSF).
2. Calculation of Service Tax liability.
3. Admissibility of exemption for services to educational institutions.
4. Payment of interest on unpaid Service Tax.
5. Maintainability of the settlement application post-adjudication.

Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Evasion of Service Tax by M/s. Vishal Security Force (VSF):
M/s. VSF was engaged in providing security agency services and was duly registered for Service Tax. Investigations revealed that VSF collected Service Tax from clients but failed to remit the full amount to the government for the period 2010-11 to 2014-15. The Service Tax payable was Rs. 1,17,76,183/-, but only Rs. 64,50,356/- was paid. Further calculations showed a liability of Rs. 4,25,55,151/-, with an unpaid amount of Rs. 2,96,69,047/- as of 11-2-2016.

2. Calculation of Service Tax liability:
VSF disputed the method of calculating Service Tax based on higher figures from the Balance Sheet and Form 26AS, arguing it should be based solely on Balance Sheet figures after accounting for bad debts. They also claimed the correct liability was Rs. 3,44,92,387/- instead of Rs. 4,25,55,151/-. They paid Rs. 3,37,19,561/- in cash and Rs. 7,72,826/- via Cenvat credit, totaling Rs. 3,44,92,387/-.

3. Admissibility of exemption for services to educational institutions:
VSF argued that services to educational institutions were exempt from Service Tax under Notification No. 25/2012-S.T., effective from 1st July 2012. The department extended this exemption only from 11-7-2014, which VSF contested, claiming it should apply from 1-7-2012.

4. Payment of interest on unpaid Service Tax:
The department calculated interest at varying rates, while VSF contended it should be a consistent 18% as per the rate at the time of default. VSF calculated interest liability at Rs. 1,20,05,774/- and paid an additional Rs. 29,98,285/- towards differential interest.

5. Maintainability of the settlement application post-adjudication:
Revenue reported that the case was adjudicated by Order-in-Original No. 62/ST-V/SKD/16-17, dated 21-2-2017, dispatched on 10-3-2017, the same day VSF filed their settlement application. As per Section 32E of the Central Excise Act, 1944, an application must be filed before adjudication. The Settlement Commission, referencing the Bombay High Court's decision in M/s. Vishnu Steels v. Union of India, held that the application was not maintainable as it was filed after the adjudication order was dispatched.

Conclusion:
The Settlement Commission rejected the application by M/s. Vishal Security Force as not maintainable under Section 32E(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, due to the timing of the application post-adjudication. The Commission emphasized that the application should have been filed before the adjudication order was dispatched.

---