TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 1374X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of their services as security persons or otherwise will not turn the service provided by the appellant into the security agency services. Not only that, the service recipient have also clarified that the mention of the same as security services in their ledgers is out of ignorance on the part of the person responsible for maintaining such records. The appellant have accepted their liabilit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . As a result of audit, proceedings were initiated against them on the ground that they have suppressed the value of the said services provided by them to their various clients, resulting in evasion of service tax. Accordingly, proceedings stand initiated against them culminating into present impugned order confirming the demand to the tune of ₹ 8,03,457/- along with imposition of penalty of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ith their customers and found that the same were for Manpower Supply. However, he observed that in respect of certain clients, the Manpower supplied by the appellant were used as Security Guards and as such the said services have to be held as Security Agency Services. Accordingly, he held that the demand in respect of the same is liable to be confirmed. For the above proposition, Commissioner (Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nnel maintaining ledgers are not masters of Income Tax or Central Excise law and out of ignorance they have shown the payment towards security services, which is not correct, inasmuch as these payments were for supply of manpower. She submits that the lower authorities have failed to consider the said certificates and in the absence of any rebuttal to the same, the certificates are required to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... npower supply services, which was introduced in the statute w.e.f. 16.06.2005. Inasmuch as the period involved in the present appeal is prior to 16.06.2005, no tax liability would arise against the assessee on the said count. 6. However, we note that the appellant have accepted their liability to the extent of ₹ 3.10 lakhs which is on account of suppression of the value of Security Agency ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
