2010 (11) TMI 384

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Respondent. [Order]. - Heard both sides. 2. Revenue filed this Appeal against the impugned order whereby Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the demand of Service Tax of Rs. 65,207/-(Rupees Sixty Five Thousand Two Hundred and Seven only) and penalties on the ground that demand is time barred. 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that Respondents are providing security agency ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... demand on the ground of limitation. Commissioner (Appeals) held that as first Show Cause Notice was issued on 23-4-2004 therefore the Revenue was aware of the fact regarding the service provided by the Respondents. 4. Contention of Revenue is that the first Show Cause Notice was issued for not filing the returns and it is only from the information from the recipient of service the second ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....provider of taxable service. Investigations were carried out from the recipient of the service and Revenue came to know that Respondents is providing taxable service i.e. security agency service. On the basis of this another Show Cause Notice was issued on 21-8-2006 alleging suppression with intent to evade payment of duty. As the Respondents had not filed any monthly returns for the period Octobe....