TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 749
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lkata. On the basis of the allegation that the appellant has paid Service Tax only on the amount received as monetary consideration from the Airports Authority of India and not discharged their Service Tax liability on the nonmonetary consideration received, a Show Cause Notice dated 21.10.2014 was issued was issued, demanding Service Tax of Rs.80,98,449/- (inclusive of cesses), along with interest. The said Notice also proposed imposition of various penalties. 3. The above Show Cause Notice was adjudicated vide the Order-in-Original No. 71/PR. COMMR/STI/KOL/2016-17 dated 14.09.2016 wherein the demand of Service Tax of Rs.80,98,449/-, as proposed in the Show Cause Notice, has been confirmed, along with interest. A penalty of Rs.80,98,449/- has also been imposed under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.The adjudication order also demanded interest of Rs.21,02,016/- for the delayed payment of Service Tax. A late fee amounting to Rs.33,500/- was also levied for the delay in filing the ST-3 Returns along with a penalty of Rs.10,000/- under Section 76 of the Act. 3.1. Aggrieved by the confirmation of the demand of Service Tax, along with interest, penalties and late fee thereon, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ices rendered by them has been under dispute during the period i.e., 2009-10 to 2012-13 (up to 30.06.2012); the service receiver has not paid the service tax to them; after the issue has been clarified by Home Ministry, they have received the payment of Service Tax from the Airports Authority of India in a delayed manner, which was deposited with the Department immediately upon receipt. Accordingly, the contention of the appellant in this regard is that there was no delay in payment of Service Tax on their part and thus, the interest demand of Rs.21,02,016/- raised on them is unsustainable. 4.3. Regarding the levy of late fee for violation of Section 70 of the Act and imposition of penalty under Section 76 of the Act, the appellant contends that they have remitted the Service Tax as and when they have received it from the AAI Management, Kolkata . Thus, the appellant prayed for waiver of the late fee of Rs.33,500/- and penalty of Rs.10,000/- as imposed on them vide the impugned order. 4.4. In view of the above, the appellant has prayed for setting aside the demands of Service Tax, along with interest, penalty and late fee, as confirmed vide the impugned order. 5. On the ot....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ices provided by service provider. In the instant case, service provider is Central Industrial Security Force who was providing security service to Airport Authority of India. On the emoluments rents paid to CISF, CISF was paying service tax. It appeared to revenue that certain other expenses incurred while receiving services by Airport Authority of India should be included in assessable value for the purpose of assessment. The said expenses were Medical Services, expenses on vehicles provided, expenditure on Dog Squad, Stationery Expenses, Telephone Charges, Expenditure incurred by Airport Authority of India on accommodation provided to CISF etc. The learned representative has submitted that except medical expenses all other expenses are directly incurred by Airport Authority of India and they are not paid to CISF and are the expenses which are incurred by Airport Authority of India directly. He has further relied on the ruling by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs Intercontinental Consultants & Technocrats Pvt. Ltd. reported at 2018 (10) GSTL 401 (SC) and further submitted that Commissioner (Appeals) Allahabad has relied on the said ruling by Hon'ble S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rports Authority of India, Management, NSCBIA, Kolkata by the 10th of the following month after passing the pay and allowance, other bills from the Regional Pay & Accounts Office. The Airports Authority of India Management realized the amount of cost of deployment and Service Tax as per the budget/funds availability. The appellant thereafter deposited the Service Tax amount so received by them from the Airports Authority of India, immediately upon receipt of the same. Thus, we find that the delay in payment of Service Tax, if any, was not on the part of the appellant. Furthermore, during the said period, there was confusion regarding the liability to Service Tax on security services, as rendered by the appellant, and therefore, the appellant cannot be faulted for the delay in payment of Service Tax. 9.1. We find that a similar issue has already been examined by this Tribunal in the case of Central Industrial Security Force, IOC Haldia Refinery v. Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Haldia [Final Order No. 77622 of 2023 dated 24.11.2023 in Service Tax Appeal No. 536 of 2012 - CESTAT, Kolkata]. The relevant paragraphs of the said order have been reproduced below: - ....