Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Central Excise-Meerut-II Versus M/s Men Power Security Agency And (Vice-Versa)

2018 (1) TMI 556 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD

Penalties u/s 77 and 78 of FA, 1994 - Valuation - inclusion of salary of the security personnel in the value of the service to be provided by security agents services or not? - Held that: - the issue was the subject matter of litigation before various higher forums. As such, it can be concluded that the issue was not free from the doubt, thus leading to a bonafide belief on the part of the appellant that no service tax is liable to be paid on the same - As soon as the Revenue pointed out the sai .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

spite of the notice having been sent to them well in advance. Accordingly, I have heard the learned A.R. appearing for the Revenue and have gone through the impugned orders. 2. It is seen that the appellant as well as the Revenue has challenged the said order of Commissioner (Appeals) vide which he has upheld the confirmation of demand but has extended the benefit of cum-duty to the assessee. The Revenue being aggrieved by the said part of the order, has filed the present appeal. The assessee i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t was found, on scrutiny of their records, that the salaries of the security guards is also to be a part of the value of the service, for which proceedings were initiated against them by way of issuance of a show cause notice, invoking the extended period of limitation. It is also seen that the appellant before issuance of show cause notice, deposited duty alongwith interest and only challenged penalty on the ground that they were under bonafide belief that only the commission received is to for .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e Act. 6. Being aggrieved with the said order, appellant filed an appeal before Commissioner (Appeals), who upheld the imposition of penalties but granted relief to the assessee by treating the entire consideration as cum duty. 7. Hence present two appeals, one by the appellant and other by the Revenue. 8. It is seen that the issue of cum duty price stands settled by Catena of judgments of the Higher Courts and is no longer res-integra. No infirmity can be found in the order of Commissioner (App .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version