2009 (3) TMI 42

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and Shri P. Karthikeyan, Member (T) Shri R. Janardhanan Pillai, Consultant for the Appellants. ShriN.J. Kumaresh, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P. Karthikeyan, Member (T)] - The impugned order affirmed demand of service tax of Rs.17,450/- under Section 66(1) of the Service Tax Act, 1994 towards taxable service falling under the category "security agency services" found to have be....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... that the demand of service tax was confirmed under Section 66(1) of the Service Tax Act, 1994. Section 66(1) of the Finance Act is the charging section for levy of service tax. Machinery for recovering tax not paid is contained in Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994. Therefore, the demand was wrongly confirmed under an irrelevant section. It is also submitted that larger period has been invoked i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....otice invoked Section 11 of the Central Excise Act to demand the service tax not paid by the appellants. We find that it is a fundamental flaw which vitiated the entire proceedings. Moreover, the demand of service tax is found to have been confirmed under Section 66(1) of the Service Tax Act, 1994. Firstly there is no Act called Service Tax Act, 1994; as regards Section 66(1) of the Finance Act, 1....