TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 1275
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....are as follows: Sl. No. 1 2 Appeal No. ST/50172/2020 ST/51243/2022 Show Cause Notice No.05/2019-20 Dated 22.04.2019 No.05/125/2019-20 Dated 16.10.2019 Impugned Orders Order-in-Original No.45/2019-20 Dated 23.10.2019 Order-in-Appeal No.24/2021-22 Dated 06.01.2022 arising out of Order-in-Original dated 21.09.2020 Period of Dispute 2013-14 to 2016-17 April to June 2017 Service Tax Demand Rs.2,37,29,613/- Rs.15,17,403/- 2. The facts for both the appeals are as follows: (i) The appellants M/s. NNS Online Pvt Ltd. are registered for providing taxable services of Security/Detective Agency Services, Business Exhibition services and Works Contract services. Based on an intelligence wi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hese orders are mentioned in the table above. Being aggrieved of both the said orders that the appellant is before this Tribunal. 3. We have heard Shri Sanjeev Bajaj, learned Chartered Accountant for the appellant and Shri Shashank Yadav, learned authorised representative appearing for the Department. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant has mentioned that appellant company was incorporated with the sole object of doing the business of publishing of newspaper, magazines etc., during the period in dispute. In both the appeals the appellant has been doing the said business and was receiving the income from sale/subscription of newspapers, magazines, receiving advertisements from various clients in these newspapers and magazines and sell....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....age of search till the adjudication by the departmental authorities. The documents are clear to prove that the appellant was receiving income from publishing newspapers, magazines, advertisement and sale of data. The findings are contrary to the voluminous documentary records. Show cause notices were issued invoking the extended period of limitation despite the fact that there is no iota of any alleged suppression. With these submissions both the orders are prayed to be set aside and both the appeals are prayed to be allowed. 6. Learned authorised representative for the department has, at the outset, reiterated the findings arrived at in the impugned orders. It is submitted that the appellants contentions in their defence reply to the sh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eracity of said findings. It is observed that in Column-A10 thereof, where the tax details with respect to security detective agency services mentioned, it is clear that the service tax for the said activity has been paid by the appellant under Reverse Charge Mechanism in terms of section 68 (2) of the Finance Act. The appellant, therefore, apparently, is the service recipient of security detective agency services. This particular observation is sufficient to falsify one of the finding of the adjudicating authority below as mentioned above. 10. It is also observed that at the stage of search itself it was found that the appellant and its group companies are engaged in publishing newspapers and monthly journals and also in organising e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... per Clause (e) and (g) under section 66 (D) of the Finance Act, 1994 read with Notification No.19/2012-ST dated 05.06.2012. 13. These facts were brought to the notice of the adjudicating authorities but have miserably being ignored. Confirmation of demand contrary to the statutory mandate amounts to illegality and, accordingly, is liable to be set aside. 14. Finally, we observe that the impugned demand is based on appellants' own documents recovered at the time of search of their premises. Nothing, in addition, has been unearthed by the department. The appellant has been discharging service tax on business exhibition services and has also been discharging the liability of tax under Reverse Charge Mechanism in terms of Notification No....