Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2014 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (9) TMI 345 - AT - Service TaxCommercial Training or Coaching - principle of judicial discipline - retrospective amendment was made Vide Section 76 of the Finance Act, 2010 - graduate or post graduate courses - assessee contended that ‘education’ has never been intended to be taxed. Education is different from training or coaching and is not covered by the levy. - Held that:- From the retrospective amendment cited above, it is clear that any centre or institute, by whatever name called, where training or coaching is imparted for a consideration is liable to service tax. There is no dispute in the present case that the appellant herein is charging for the so called under graduate or post graduate courses conducted by them and they are operating their business in a commercial manner. It is also an accepted fact that the courses conducted by the appellant are not recognized by law. In view of the decision of the Tribunal in ICFAI case [2013 (6) TMI 446 - CESTAT BANGALORE], we are bound to follow the same as a matter of judicial discipline. - the activities undertaken by the appellant would merit classification under “commercial training or coaching” as defined in the Finance Act, 1994. - Decided against the assessee. Extended period of limitation - Held that:- Mere failure to register with the department and pay service tax, by itself can not amount to suppression unless the same was with an intent to evade payment of tax. There is no evidence led by the Revenue to that effect either in the show cause notice or in the Impugned order. Therefore, the demand is sustainable only for the normal period of limitation. - Decided in favor of assessee. Valuation - inclusion of mess charges, hostel charges and payment for the laptops supplied to the students - Held that:- Mess charges and hostel fees are for providing boarding and lodging to the students and cannot be attributed to the training or coaching rendered. Similarly, the amount recovered for the supply of laptops also cannot be attributed to the services rendered (it relates to supply of goods) and therefore, these amounts collected towards mess charges, hostel charges and laptops are excludible from the taxable value of the service rendered - Decided in favor of assessee. Levy of penalty - Since we have held that there is no suppression on the part of the appellant, penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 also does not sustain - penalty dropped - Decided partly in favor of assessee.
|