CourtKutchehry.com
Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2024) 02 CESTAT CK 0024

Police Commissioner And Others vs Commissioner Of Central Excise & ST, Surat-I And Others

Customs, Excise And Service Tax Appellate Tribunal · Decided on 15 February 2024

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ramesh Nair, Member (J) · C.L. Mahar, Member (T)
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Service Tax Appeal No. 13637 Of 2014, 10515 Of 2015, Service Tax Cross No. 10162 Of 2015

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 330 words

Ramesh Nair, Member (J)

1.

The issue involved is that the service of security escort/ detecting agency provided by the Police Commissioner, Surat and consideration received their against is liable to service tax or otherwise. Against the common order assessee the police Commissioner filed Appeal No ST/10515/2015 contesting the demand of service tax. Revenue also filed Appeal No. ST/13637/2014 seeking imposition of penalty which was not imposed by the adjudicating authority. Since the Revenue appeal is consequential to the demand of service tax, assessee’s appeal is taken first for consideration.

2.

Shri Rahul Gajera, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that the issue of levy of service tax on the police department for various service such as escort service, detecting agency service provided to various agencies and consideration received here against is not liable to service tax as held in various following judgments:-

(a) Deputy Commissioner of Police Jodhpur vs. Commissioner – 2017 (48) STR 275 –(Tri. Del) upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported at Commissioner vs. Deputy Commissioner – 2018 (11) GSTL J133 (SC)

(b) Jamnagar Police vs. CCE and ST, Rajkot - 2023 (12) TMI 183-

3.

Shri Rajesh Nathan, Learned Assistant Commissioner (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the finding of the impugned order.

4.

We have carefully considered the submission made by both sides and perused the records. We find that the issue is no longer res-integra as in the various judgments including the judgments cited by the assessee, it is categorically held that security service provided by the police department to various agencies and consideration their against received by them is not liable to service tax under security agency service. Therefore, the issue is no longer res-integra. Therefore, the demand is set aside, consequently no penalty can be imposed as sought in the Revenue’s appeal.

5.

Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside. Appeal of Assessee is allowed and appeal of revenue is dismissed. CO also stands disposed of.