2018 (6) TMI 436

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ellant Shri S. Govindarajan, AC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Brief facts are that the appellants are registered with the Service Tax Department for providing security agency services. Pursuant to audit of accounts, it was noticed that the appellant  had not paid the service tax collected from their customers for the period April 2008 to December 2008 and had thus short-paid the serv....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r agency. The department was of the view that since the appellant has received the payment from such residential clients, they are liable to discharge the service tax on the said amounts to the tune of Rs. 13,29,016/-. He submitted that the appellant has not retained any amount in respect of the services that were outsourced. That therefore the appellant is not able to pay service tax in regard to....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mount of Rs. 17,05,817/- as well as the demand of Rs. 13,21,165/- which according to the appellant is the amount received for the security services which have been outsourced by the appellant. He has relied upon the Boards Circular No.96/7/2007-ST dated 23.8.2007 and argued that the said services have been sub-contracted and the appellant is not liable to pay the service tax. It is also argued by....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ervice tax prior to issuance of show cause notice. On perusal of records, we find that in respect of services which the appellant was rendering directly, they have discharged the service to the tune of Rs. 17,05,817/- which is much prior to the issue of show cause notice. Therefore, the penalty imposed on this count cannot sustain. The department has issued the show cause notice incorporating thes....