Case Details: Saisun Outsourcing Services Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Goods, Service Tax, Jabalpur (2025) 28 Centax 118 (Tri.-Del)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Ms Binu Tamta, Member (J) & Ms Hemambika R. Priya, Member (T)
- Shri Manoj Kumar, Authorized Representative, for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The appellant, engaged in providing farm labour for agricultural operations, Business Facilitator services, SIM distribution, and manpower supply services, was subjected to an audit by the Department for the period 2015 to 2018. During the audit, the appellant submitted copies of agreements and sample invoices with their clients, asserting that the services provided were exempt from service tax. However, upon verification, the Department discovered discrepancies between the agreements submitted by the appellant and those procured directly from its clients. It was established that the appellant had rendered taxable services but deliberately suppressed this fact, resulting in the evasion of service tax. The appellant had also misrepresented the nature of its services and furnished fabricated documents, including work orders, agreements, and invoices, before the audit team. Consequently, a demand for service tax, along with interest and penalties, was raised against the appellant under Section 66 of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant contested the demand, arguing that certain amounts were duplicated and that it had provided tax-exempt services.
CESTAT Held
The Hon’ble Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that the appellant mis-declared taxable services in its ST-3 returns and failed to provide original invoices or credible evidence. It upheld the demand, ruling that the appellant deliberately evaded tax. Given the submission of fabricated documents and lack of merit in the appellant’s claims, the Tribunal confirmed the service tax liability, interest, and penalties.
List of Notifications Cited
- Notification No. 25/2012, dated 20-6-2012 [Paras 2, 5]
