TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 739X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... client and also engages different personnel for serving the food. This would indicate that the appellant has not engaged himself in preparing food and serving the same to the employees of Alfa Laval (India) Ltd., though the employees of Alfa Laval (India) Ltd., are the members of the appellant co-operative society. On perusal of the agreement entered by the appellant with Alfa Laval (India) Ltd., we find that Alfa Laval (India) Ltd., had decided to engage specialized services in respect of catering services for their employees and appellant's credential was considered, having demonstrated their expertise in the said activity with their own trained personnel and having offered to undertake the activities relating to the catering service o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dered by the appellant would fall under the category of Outdoor Catering Service for the period 10.09.2004 to 31.07.2009. Appellant contested the show-cause notice issued to them on merits as well as on limitation. The main ground of the appellant before the adjudicating authority was that they are a Co-operative Society of the employees and they are only preparing the food while all the items required for preparation of food, utensils, space, water and electricity are provided by their client M/s. Alfa Laval (India) Ltd. and also the invocation of extended period is incorrect. Adjudicating authority after following due process of law confirmed the demands raised with interest and also imposed penalties. The adjudicating authority appropr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. He would place reliance on the judgement of the Tribunal in the case of Rajeev Kumar Gupta v. CCE - 2009 (16) STR 26 (Tri. Del.) for the proposition that in that case a similar set of facts were there and all the utilities and facilities were provided by the appellant therein and the appellant therein only engaged himself in preparation and serving food at the Company premises. He would submit that the appellant had already discharged the service tax liability and has also paid interest. 4. Learned D.R. on the other hand would draw our attention to various clauses of the said agreement. He would submit that the activity undertaken would fall under the category of provisions of definition of outdoor catering services . He would submit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Act, 1994. The said definition states that Section 65(24) defines the term caterer as under: Caterer means any person who supplies, either directly or indirectly, any food, edible preparations, alcoholic or non-alcoholic beverages or crockery and similar articles or accoutrements for any purpose or occasion; Section 65(105) (76a) defines the term outdoor caterer as under: outdoor caterer means a caterer engaged in providing services in connection with catering at a place other than his own but including a place provided by way of tenancy or otherwise by the person receiving such services; Section 65(105) (zzt) of the Act defines taxable service in relation to outdoor catering service as under: (zzt) to any person, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ia)) Ltd., appellant cannot claim that they are not provider of the catering service. 6.4 Thirdly, the finding of the first appellate authority is relevant as recorded in para 10.2 and is reproduced as under:- I find that in this case the appellants are Employees' Co-operative Consumers' Society of employees of Alfa Laval (India) Ltd., Mumbai-Pune Road, Pune. The appellants have entered into an agreement dated 22.10.2008, with M/s Alfa Laval (India) Ltd., for providing catering services. According to the clause 1,2 and 3 of the said agreement, the appellants are Contractor and responsible for providing catering services for employees of the Company. As per the agreement, the appellants are responsible for preparation of break ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 994, the above service becomes taxable and the appellants are required to pay service tax on the foresaid catering services provided by them to the company. I therefore reject the contention of the appellants that such services are by them to their own employees. It is also not correct that the appellants have provided only manpower to the company as such are not the terms of the contract. The appellants are under the contractual obligations to provide catering services to the aforesaid company. In view of the above I find that the adjudicating authority have rightly held that the appellants have provided catering services to the company and are required to pay service tax thereon along with interest. 6.5 The above and factual finding h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
