9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 59X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... General of Central Excise Intelligence (DGCEI), revealed that the appellant was providing security services to other group companies but were not registered with the jurisdictional excise authorities for the purpose of payment of service tax. They provided security services to their group companies, namely, Zee Telefilms Ltd., Essel Propack Ltd., Playwin Infravest Pvt. Ltd., ASC Enterprises Ltd., ETC Network, E-City Entertainment and Pan India Paryatan Ltd. and were receiving consideration for the services rendered of a fixed sum every month. The consideration so received amounted to Rs. 10,23,69,997/- for the period 31/10/1999 to July 2004 and the service tax payable thereon amounted to Rs. 59,40,500/-. Accordingly, a show-cause notice dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... am Bendre, Vice President (Accounts) of ETC Networks Ltd., one of the recipients of the service has also stated that the services received by them form the appellant included guidance on business planning, financial planning, auditing, business strategy and security services. Shri Amol Chandra, Financial Advisor of Essel Group in his statement dated 28/01/2004 has also confirmed receipt of services such as management advice, auditing, advice on deployment of funds and market borrowing in addition to security services. Reliance is also placed on the Circular dated 26/08/2002 and 07/02/2003 which indicates the share of the each other group companies for the services rendered by the appellant to them. In their reply to the show-cause notice al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bility on the security services rendered would amount to only Rs. 15 lakhs as against the demand of Rs. 59 lakhs confirmed in the impugned order. Accordingly, he prays that the impugned order be set aside and appeal allowed. 4. The Ld. AR appearing for the Revenue on the other hand refers to the statement of Shri Mohender Garg, Director of the appellant firm, who in his statement dated 04/02/2004 had confirmed that his company was engaged in providing security services to M/s. Essel group of companies and except for 47 security personnel, one peon and five drivers, there was no other staff working in the appellant company. He also placed reliance of statement of Shri P.B. Pillai. Security Officer, who in his statement dated 22/01/2004 had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Circulars dated 26/08/2002 and 07/02/2003, they do not have any other document to produce in support of their claims that they had rendered various services such as housekeeping, maintenance, group auditing, advices and financial planning and strategy, etc., in addition to security services. We have perused the circular dated 26/08/2002 and 07/02/2003. The said circulars does not reveal anything about the nature of the services rendered by merely gives the share of expenses by each of the group companies to the appellant on a monthly basis. From these circulars, it cannot be concluded that the services rendered by the appellants were not other than security services. It is in this context, the statements of the employees of the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the various premises. In the records, there is an extract of the Ledger Account of M/s. ETC Networks Ltd., one of the recipients of the services. The said ledger shows payment of a sum of Rs. 1,89,740/- per month of the appellant and the payments are shown as "towards security charges". The journal extracts of other service recipients such as Pan India, Network Infravest Ltd., also shows a monthly fixed payment to the appellant towards service charges. If the appellant had indeed rendered a multiplicity of services, the charges would have varied every month which also is a pointer towards the fact that the appellant rendered only one type of service. From the statements of the employees of the appellant firm, the service rendered was only ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facts and therefore, extended period time cannot be invoked, the appellant has not brought on record any evidence to prove their bonafides. Bonafide belief is not blind belief but has to be based on reasonable measures taken to entertain such belief. There is nothing in the records to show that the appellant consulted either the department or obtained any legal opinion as their liability towards service tax. In the absence of any such evidence, it is difficult to accept this contention. Inasmuch as the appellant did not obtain any registration nor did they follow any of the statutory procedures, the appellant had clearly suppressed the facts from the department with an intent to evade service tax. In these circumstances, the confirmation of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
