TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 544X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Tribunal was also upheld by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka reported in [2011 (4) TMI 191 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT]. This Tribunal also followed the ratio of the said decision in the case of Manager, Ravindra Kalakshetra (2007 (10) TMI 208 - CESTAT, BANGALORE) and also in the case of Surat Municipal Corporation v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Surat reported in [2006 (2) TMI 45 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI]. Thus, we are of the considered view that the activity undertaken by the appellant in the present case would get squarely covered under the category of “Mandap Keeper Services” and the appellants are liable to pay Service Tax on the said activity accordingly. In the case of Statutory/Government bodies, there can be no mala fide intentio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to service tax under the category of Mandap Keeper Services during the period from 1998-99 to 2004-05. The adjudicating authority held that they are liable to service tax under the above category and confirmed the service tax demand vide Order-in-Original dated 13-3-2006. Interest on the service tax liability was also confirmed and penalties were imposed on the appellant under Sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who vide the impugned order upheld the Order-in-Original. Hence the appellants are before us. 3. None appeared for the appellant in spite of notice. The case was listed for hearing earlier on a number of occasions on 13-8-2012, 25-9-2012, 19-11-20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ovided to such person, in relation to such use and also the services, if any, provided or to be provided as a caterer. Section 65(66) defines Mandap as any immovable property as defined under Section 3 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 and includes any furniture, fixtures, light fittings and floor coverings therein let out for consideration for organizing any official, social or business function. As per explanation thereto, social function includes marriage. 4.2 The question to be decided is when the Auditorium is rented out for conducting cultural functions, whether the same would get covered within the definition of Mandap Keeper. This very issue was considered by this Tribunal in the case of Secretary, Town Hall Committee (supra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ained and whether the appellant can be charged with intention to evade payment of Service Tax? A similar issue was considered in the case of Surat Municipal Corporation case (supra) and it was held that in the case of Statutory/Government bodies, there can be no mala fide intention to evade payment of Service Tax and it can be considered only as an omission on the part of the appellants and, therefore, there is no need to impose any penalty and invoke any extended period of time. A similar view was held in the case of other Government bodies, in BEST Undertaking v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai - 2007 (213) E.L.T. 202. 4.4 Following the ratios of the above decisions, in the present case also, we hold that the demand of Service T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
