TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 1675X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... charges for the same. The appellant is required to carry out the above services to the customers of Railways, who are passengers travelling in the AC compartments. Since it is the responsibility of the Railways to provide the services and the appellant has provide the services on behalf of the Railways, the services are rightly classifiable under Business Auxiliary Service . The classification of the service under Business Auxiliary Service upheld - Since the appellant has not even got registered their services for payment of service tax, penalty also upheld. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - Service Tax Appeals Nos.54143-54144/2014(DB) - Final Orders Nos.51767-51768/2018 - Dated:- 8-5-2018 - Shri V. Padmanabha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant. In the impugned order, the services rendered by the appellant were classified under the category of Business Auxiliary Service defined under Section 65 (19) of the Act and the demand of service tax was made along with an order for payment of interest as well as penalties also under various sections of the Finance At, 1994. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the present appeals have been filed. 4. With the above background, we have heard Shri R.S. Sharma, ld. Advocate for the appellant and Shri Sanjay Jain, ld. DR for the respondent/Revenue. 5. Ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant argued the case of the appellant and his arguments are summarized below:- (1) He submitted that the contract was awarded by Jodhpur Div ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng of the same but also distribution of the same to the passengers during their journey in trains by deploying their own personnel. He drew our attention to the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) in para 5.3. and 5.4 of the impugned order, in which the detailed reasons have been given justifying the classification under Business Auxiliary Service . As such, he submitted that the impugned order may be upheld. 7. Ld. DR also relied on the Tribunal s decision in the case of R.C. Goel Vs. CCE, New Delhi 2017 (5) G.S.T.L. 324 (Tribunal-Delhi). 8. We have heard both the sides, at length, and perused the records. 9. First, we deal with the question of jurisdiction. The appellant have their office in Ratlam (M.P.), from where he h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is required to carry out the above services to the customers of Railways, who are passengers travelling in the AC compartments. Since it is the responsibility of the Railways to provide the services and the appellant has provide the services on behalf of the Railways, we are of the view that the services are rightly classifiable under Business Auxiliary Service as has been held in the impugned order. This view also finds support in the decision of the Tribunal in the case of R.C. Goel (supra), in which case the Tribunal observed as under:- 10. On carefully considering the submissions made by both the sides and on perusal of the records, we are of the view that the supply of bed rolls as well as cleaning of coaches and toilets of trai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
