Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2021 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (12) TMI 1048 - AT - Service TaxClassification of services - security services or not - providing armed security guards to public sector banks / undertakings and government departments, and collection of charges for the same - HELD THAT:- The appellant is performing statutory duties and the amount so collected is being deposited in the government treasury. CBEC has issued a Circular No.89/7/2006-ST dated 18.12.2006 clarifying that wherever the charges collected by any sovereign public authority for carrying out any statutory function, the same is not liable to levy of service tax. Further, there is a CESTAT decision THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE JODHPUR, SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX, JAIPUR- [2016 (12) TMI 289 - CESTAT NEW DELHI], where it was concluded that the police department which is in the agency of State Government cannot be considered to be a person engaged in the business of running security services. The CESTAT in the said decision has held that the activity undertaken by the police is not covered by the definition of security agency under Section 64(94) of the Finance Act, 1994 - same view has been expressed by the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of MUMBAI POLICE VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX, MUMBAI [2018 (4) TMI 418 - CESTAT MUMBAI]. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|