TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 629X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the applicant herein was not aware of the same and not could not submit any defence to the same - matter is required to be remanded to the original adjudicating authority. This is because, the letters obtained after issue of show-cause notice should have been provided to the appellants. Even though the appellant himself has admitted the realization of service tax from KEONICS, ongoing through the records, there is no clarity on this issue. At the same time, it cannot be said that the appellants are not liable to tax and in our opinion, at least an amount of ₹ 2 lakhs is clearly payable by the appellant and it may not be appropriate to remand the matter without putting the appellant into terms. - stay granted partly - matter remanded ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etc., and relates to 41 Government High Schools in Mandya District. (ii)Services are provided on behalf of KEONICS and that too for students of class 8th, 9th 10th based on syllabus approved by Government of Karnataka/DSERT in the medium of instruction viz., Kannada/English, which will become evident from the scope of contract, in the agreement dated 01/08/2007. Thus the said imparting of computer training being in the nature of education and is being provided as part of curriculum and on behalf of the said KEONICS thereof. (iii) Moreover, the said education as part of curriculum is also placed in the negative list even for the period subsequent to 01/7/2012 and hence could not be taxed even for the earlier period ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tration etc. to claim bona fides, which is not the factual position herein. (viii) Thus the entire demand of service tax confirmed in respect of the said MSP project for a total amount of ₹ 14,48,552/- (with Ed. Cesses), on the applicant herein would deserve to be set aside in toto thereof. In this connection, respectful reliance is placed on Misc. Order No. 27002/2013 dated 26/8/2013. 2.2 The balance amount of service tax involved of ₹ 1,74,124/- relates to franchisee services under the brand name of KEONICS YUVA.COM , being also in the nature of providing computer education and hence cannot become commercial training or coaching and in any case already an amount of ₹ 65,240/- has been paid which has been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... KEONICS, including to the extent indicated therein, would be unsustainable and the applicant herein had no opportunity to defend the same. Thus for this prima facie reason alone, the impugned orders would deserve to be set aside and matter remanded to the original authority for de novo adjudication in the interest of justice and in compliance with the principles natural justice thereof. Even the said reliance placed at paragraphs 67 and 68 of the said order-in-original dated 31/08/2012, only relates to the alleged service tax having been paid of ₹ 5,43,295/- for the period form August 2009 to May 2010 and no such service tax payment having been made for the prior periods is forthcoming thereof. 2.6. Similarly it is also incorrect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arity on this issue. At the same time, it cannot be said that the appellants are not liable to tax and in our opinion, at least an amount of ₹ 2 lakhs is clearly payable by the appellant and it may not be appropriate to remand the matter without putting the appellant into terms. In view of the above submissions, taking into account the interest quantum also, the appellant is required to deposit an amount of ₹ 3,00,000/- (Rupees Three lakhs only) within 12 weeks and report compliance on 09/10/2014. Subject to compliance with the above requirement, the requirement of pre-deposit of balance dues is waived. It is made clear that compliance should be reported to the original adjudicating authority on 09/10/2014 and thereafter, after ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
