TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 551
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n-confirmation of demand and non-imposition of commensurate penalties. 2. The brief facts are as follows: M/s Corporate Housekeeping Services Private Limited, (appellant in Service Tax Appeal No. 50011 Of 2017) and (respondent in Service Tax Appeal No. 50274 Of 2017) is engaged in the activity of providing/supplying manpower and Cleaning/Housekeeping Services to various domestic organizations/companies, United Nations Organizations and International Organizations like WHO, ILO, UNESCO, FAO and SEZ units etc. The appellant/respondent have been filing Service Tax Returns regularly & discharging service tax liability under the category of 'Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency's Services'. Post audit of the records of the appellant/respondent, the Department noted that the appellant/respondent were not paying service tax on the income received from services provided to international organisations. Three Show cause Notices dated 24/10/2012, 01/05/2014, 20.04.2015 and Statement of Demand dt 21.06.2016 raising service tax demand of Rs. 96.36.318/-, Rs. 45,81,112, Rs. 20,23,607/- & Rs. 36,64,452/- (Including E. Cess and H & SE. Cess) u/s 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 in respec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Keeping services amounting to Rs. 2,05,81,959/- to Educational Institutes, which are exempt from payment of Service Tax vide clause (9) of Exemption Notification No. 25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012 (w.e.f. 01.07.2012). Thus, the tax demand amounting to Rs. 2543930/- (Including E. Cess and H & SE. Cess) on the Cleaning and House Keeping services provided to Educational Institutes value of Rs. 2,05,81,959/- are exempt be liable to be set-aside. 3.3 The ld counsel also contended that the Commissioner did not consider the fact that the appellant had provided services in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, which are not covered under Finance Act, 1994 and confirmed the tax demand of Rs. 29,047/- (Including E. Cess and H & SE. Cess) and as per Section 64 of the Finance Act, 1994 service tax provisions are applicable to whole of India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir. 3.4 He further contended that the Commissioner had not considered that output service provided to SEZ units are covered under exemption notifications issued by the Central Government and confirmed the tax demand of Rs. 2,41,843/- (Including ECess and H & SE. Cess). During the period FY 2012-13 and FY 13-14, the Noticee h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vided to SEZ: The ld. Authorized Representative submitted that the appellant-respondent neither submitted documents while replying to show cause notices nor during personal hearing granted to them. 4.1 In view of the foregoing, the ld AR submitted that the demand confirmed against the appellant-respondent was correct. 5. As regards the departmental appeal against the impugned order, the ld AR submitted that the adjudicating authority had erred in holding that the appellant - respondent had disclosed the amount of exempt service provided under the appropriate column as the services provided by them were not exempted. He also submitted that the reliance placed on the case of M/s Pushpam Pharmaceuticals Company vs Collector of C.Ex., Bombay is misplaced as in the instant case it was recorded which revealed that they were not discharging the service tax liability on the amount received by them in lieu of providing services to international organisations. He further contended that in the self-assessment regime, the onus to correctly assess service tax liability lies on the appellant - respondent which they had failed to discharge. In addition, the learned AR submitted that the imp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... said Act. EXPLANATION:- For the purposes of this notification, "International Organisation" means an international organisation declared by the Central Government in pursuance of section 3 of the United Nations (Privileges and Immunities) Act, 1947 (46 of 1947), to which the provisions of the Schedule to the said Act apply. [Notification No. 16/2002-S.T., dated 2-8-2002]" 7.1 In the instant case, we find that the appellant-respondent has provided services to UNDP, UNICEF, UN Women, UN AIDS, UNODC, & UNOPS. The question before us is whether the said organisations are covered by the aforesaid notification. For the period prior to 01.07.2012, the applicable notification was Notification no. 16/2002 which exempted United Nations or International Organisation or an International Organisation, which was declared by the Central Government in pursuance of section 3 of the United Nations (Privileges and Immunities) Act, 1947. It is generally understood that United Nations is part of the UN system, which in addition to itself comprises many specialised agencies, funds, programmes, each having their own area of work, leadership and budget. We note that the six organs of the Unite....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion under the Notification no. 25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012, which is reproduced hereinafter for ease of reference: "Notification no. 25/2012 -ST dated 20.06.2012 In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 93 of the Finance Act, 1994 (32 of 1994) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and in supersession of notification number 12/2012- Service Tax, dated the 17th March, 2012, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i) vide number G.S.R. 210 (E), dated the 17th March, 2012, the Central Government, being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby exempts the following taxable services from the whole of the service tax leviable thereon under section 66B of the said Act, namely:- 1. Services provided to the United Nations or a specified international organization; ............................................................................................................................................" As per the said notification as well, we observe that it granted similar exemption from payment service tax on all the taxable services to United Nations or a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sations' is for limited purpose and has nothing to do with exemption provided to United Nations. We hold that to avail exemption under the Notification No. 25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012, one has to be either United Nations or a notified International Organization. We note that the Mega Exemption Notification No. 25/2012-ST provides exemption to United Nations and there is no condition in this notification that any organizations/agency attached or affiliated to the United Nations also requires to be notified by Central Govt. under Section 3 of the United Nations (Privileges and Immunities) Act, 1947. Hence, we hold that the exemption to United Nations is general in nature and services provided to UNDP, UNICEF, UN Women, UN AIDS, UNODC, & UNOPS is available on the basis of mega exemption Notification No. 25/2012-ST dated 20.06.2012 itself. The demand in this regard is accordingly is liable to be set aside. 8. We now take up the issue of the exemption availed by the appellant on services provided to HDFC Standard Life Insurance, based in the State of Jammu & Kashmir. We note that though the appellant has claimed the exemption, but no documentary evidence was provided by them before t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2004) and sub-section 3 of section 140 of the Finance Act, 2007 (22 of 2007) and in supersession of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), No. 40/2012-Service Tax, dated the 20th June, 2012, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R. 482 (E), dated the 20th June, 2012, except as respects things done or omitted to be done before such supersession, the Central Government, on being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby exempts the services on which service tax is leviable under section 66B of the said Act, received by a unit located in a Special Economic Zone (hereinafter referred to as SEZ Unit) or Developer of SEZ ( hereinafter referred to as the Developer) and used for the authorised operation from the whole of the service tax, education cess, and secondary and higher education cess leviable thereon. 2. The exemption shall be provided by way of refund of service tax paid on the specified services received by the SEZ Unit or the Developer and used for the authorised operations: Provided that where the specified se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... particular issue afresh after giving opportunity to the appellant-respondent to submit corroborative evidence before the adjudicating authority, in order to claim the exemption. 10. It has also been submitted before us that the appellant-respondent had rendered housekeeping services to three educational institutions viz., IIT Patna, AIIMS Patna & The Heritage School, Gurugram during the Financial Year 2014-15. We observe that mega exemption 25/2012-ST dated 20.6.2012 provided the following exemption: 9. Service provided,- (a) by an educational institution to its students, faculty and staff; (b) to an educational institution, by way of,- (i) transportation of students, faculty and staff; (ii) catering, including any mid-day meals scheme sponsored by the Government; (iii) security or cleaning or house-keeping services performed in such educational institution; (iv) services relating to admission to, or conduct of examination by such institution:] [Provided that nothing contained in clause (b) of this entry shall apply to an educational institution other than an institution providing services by way of pre-sch....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....G.D. Goenka Pvt. Ltd (2023-TIOL-782-CESTAT.DEL) held as follows: "15. Another reason given in the SCN for invoking extended period of limitation was that the appellant had deposited the disputed amount of service tax during audit but later disputed it which shows the appellant's intent to wilfully and deliberately suppress the facts. This reasoning of the Revenue cannot be accepted because there is nothing in the law which requires the assessee to accept the views of the audit or of the Revenue. There is nothing in the law by which an inference of intent to evade can be drawn if the assessee does not agree with the audit. It also does not matter if the assessee deposited the disputed amount as service tax during audit and later disputed it. Often, during audit or investigation, the assessee deposits some or all of the disputed amounts and later, on consideration or after seeking legal opinion, disputes the liability and seeks a notice or an adjudication order. This does not prove any intent to evade or deliberate or wilful suppression of facts. 16. Another ground for invoking extended period of limitation given in the impugned order is that the appellant was opera....