Rajasthan HC Orders Cyber Safety Reforms, Covering Influencer Rules and Aadhaar-Linked Digital IDs  ||  Bombay HC: SEBI Exercised Due Care and Caution in Approving the Wework India IPO Proposal  ||  Delhi HC: FEMA Summons Follow CPC, Not CrPC; ED May Call Women to Office For Statement Recording  ||  Kerala HC: Further Probe under Section 173(8) CrPC Allowed Only by Original Investigating Agency  ||  Delhi HC: Parties Must First Ask Social Media Platforms to Remove Content Before Seeking Injunction  ||  Supreme Court: Prosecutor Cannot Neglect Duty to Court in Pursuit of Securing Conviction  ||  Supreme Court: Selection Criteria Cannot be Altered After Interviews are Conducted  ||  NCLT Mumbai: Pending Cheque-Bounce Case Does not Prevent Admission of Insolvency Petition  ||  Kerala HC: Applications under the Muslim Women’s Divorce Act Have a 3-Year Limitation Period  ||  Supreme Court: Property Transferred Before Filing a Suit Cannot be Attached under Order 38 Rule 5    

Police Commissioner vs. Lakhani Piraji Vanjara - (Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal) (15 Feb 2024)

Security service provided by the police department to various agencies and consideration received by them is not liable to service tax under security agency service

MANU/CS/0073/2024

Service Tax

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 contesting the demand of service tax.

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.

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

Tags : DEMAND   CONFIRMATION   LEGALITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved