TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 1000X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d been collected by the appellants. However, in the absence of the verification with the customers as to whether these charges were in reality for providing security services, the claim of the learned Chartered Accountant that these services cannot be classified under security services prima facie has to be accepted. Nevertheless, in the absence of any detailed explanation and further in the absen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Account of the appellant, it was noticed that the income from security services shown in the account did not tally with the corresponding figures in the ST3 returns and was higher than the value of taxable services. Proceedings were initiated for demanding service tax of ₹ 14,15,764/- for the years 2003-04 and 2004-05. Besides demanding tax with interest, penalty under Section 77 78 have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... service tax on these charges also which roughly comes to about ₹ 48,000/-. 3. Learned AR would submit that appellants have collected service tax on drivers' charges, cleaning charges and gardeners' charges also. Moreover all these services have been categorized under security services in their Profit Loss account by the appellants themselves. Therefore he justifies the demand. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g/cleaning/gardening charges, it may not be said that the appellants have made out a prima facie case. Moreover admittedly in respect of certain invoices, service tax has been collected on these aspects also. Under these circumstances, it is felt that the appellants are required to be put to terms for hearing the appeal. Learned Chartered Accountant also pleaded that appellant is facing serious fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
