Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2017 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (1) TMI 37 - CESTAT NEW DELHICoaching services - denial of benefit of N/N. 24/2004-ST, dated 10.09.2004 - appellant claims to be entitled to the benefit of Notification for the reason that the trainings imparted is in the nature of vocational training or coaching, which is covered under the said exemption Notification - Held that: - the term Vocational Training Institute has been defined as one which provides vocational training, which will enable the trainee to seek employment or undertake self-employment directly after such training or coaching. It is common knowledge that acquiring skills in English language definitely improves better chance to seek employment. In this view of things, it is possible to say that the services rendered by the appellant could be covered by the Notification. N/N. 24/2004-ST has been further amended vide N/N. 03/2010-ST, dated 27.02.2010 in which the term vocational training institute has been taken to mean industrial training institute of an industrial training centre affiliated to National Council for Vocational Training. The contra decision has been delivered in the context of the amended provisions of the Notification. It has been held by the Tribunal in the case of Actor Prepares Vs.CST, Mumbai [2013 (12) TMI 1070 - CESTAT MUMBAI] that the above amendment made in N/N. 24/2004-ST cannot be taken with retrospective effect. The demand in the present case covers the period from April, 2005 to March, 2008 and is prior to the date of amendment, i.e., 27.02.2010. As such, the amendment can have no effect for the period of demand. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|