MAOSAJI CATERERS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein Service Tax demand under the category of outdoor catering service has been confirmed against them and penalties under Sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 has been imposed on them. The brief facts of the case are that under the agreement dated 30 -3 -2005 the appellant engaged in providing canteen services at the premises of M/s. Lafarge India Pvt. Ltd. during the period May, 2005 to April 2006. As per the contract entered between the parties, the appellants were required to provide food or snacks to their employees from time to time and was required to maintain certain standards of cleanliness etc. for that purpose. An investigation was conducted at the premises of M/s. Lafarge India Pvt. Ltd. and it was found that the appellant is providing outdoor catering service. Therefore, they are liable to pay Service Tax under the category of outdoor catering services as defined under Section 65(24) of Finance Act, 1994. In these set of facts, proceedings were initiated against the appellant and demand of Service Tax along with interest of various penalties under the Finance Act, 1994 was confirmed against the appellants.

(2.) THE ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that as per Section 65(24) defines the caterer, the appellant is not a caterer at all. Therefore, he is not liable to pay Service Tax on their activity. He further submits that the appellant was under a bona fide belief that the activity undertaken by them does not fall under the category of outdoor catering service. He also submits that they have not collected the Service Tax and when the proceedings were initiated against them, they paid the entire amount of Service Tax which proves that the appellants were under bona fide belief that they are not liable to pay Service Tax. Therefore, he prayed that impugned order is to be set aside.

(3.) HEARD the parties. Considered the submissions.