TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 961X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order. Only cumulative effect will have to be mentioned in the order. Rectification of Mistake application is misuse of judicial process, and the same has no merit. - ROM application dismissed. - Service Tax ROM application Nos.50850 & 50851 of 2017, Service Tax Appeal No.856-857/2010 - MO/50749-50750/2017-CU[DB] - Dated:- 17-11-2017 - Mr. (Dr.) Satish Chandra, President And Mr. V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) Shri N Vishwanathan, Advocate for the Appellants Shri Amreesh Jain, AR for the Respondent ORDER Per: (Dr.) Satish Chandra The present ROM application has been filed by stating that there is apparent mistake on record in the Tribunal s order (Final Order No.55907-55911/2017 dated 17.8.2017. 2. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment and fashion technology, advertising, graphic design, media studies to the students. They are covered under the category of Vocational Training or Coaching Services . The question in this appeal only pertains to the extension of benefit of Notification No.9/2003-S.T., dated 20-6-2003 and the Commissioner (A) has given a narrow interpretation to deny the benefit solely on the ground that the assessee are not registered with AICTE as a Vocational Institute . He submits that the order is not legal and proper. 4. Further in irritating tone, learned Counsel contested the order passed by the Tribunal. With the strength of written submissions, he seeks to recall the impugned order. 5. After hearing both the sides and perusing the mat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d for consideration, whether or not such centre or institute is registered as a trust or a society or similar other organisation under any law for the time being in force and carrying on its activity with or without profit motive and the expression commercial training or coaching shall be construed accordingly. The issue for decision is whether the activities carried out by IIMT will be covered within the definition of Commercial Training or Coaching Centre as above. If IIMT is covered by the definition the next question is whether they will be entitled to benefit of exemption notification issued for vocational training. 9. The claim of the appellants is that they will not be covered by the above definition since IIMT is owned a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not be created with retrospective effect by insertion of explanation. Consequently, even as we hold that the IIMT will fall within the definition of Commercial Training or Coaching Centre , the demand for service tax has to be restricted to that falling within the normal time limit. 10. Before we conclude on the service tax demand, it is also necessary to consider the claim of the appellant for the benefit of Notification No.9/2003 as well as Notification No.24/2004. These notifications grant exemption to vocational training institutes even if such institutes are covered by the definition of Commercial Coaching or Training Centre . The definition of vocational training institute given in the form of explanation in the said notificati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re leading to award of certificate for VLSI design and Food Beverage service for hotel professionals. Even though the certificates issued by IIMT are not recognised by law in respect of these courses, we are of the view that consideration received from the students. However, in view of the discussion in para No.9, we are of the view that such service tax levy is to be confirmed restriceted to the demand falling within the normal time limit and any demand beyond the normal time limit is set aside. The appellant will be entitled to benefit of Notification No.9/2003 as well as Notification No.24/2004 only in respect of the courses such as VLSI design as well as Food Beverage service and nor to other couses leading to award of degree b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g cases: 1. Prajatantra Prasar Samiti Vs. CIT [2003 264 ITR 160 Orrisa]; 2. CIT Vs McDowell co. Ltd. [2004 269 ITR 451 Karnataka]; and 3. CIT Vs. Malwa Texturising (P) Ltd [292 ITR 488 (MP)] 8. It may be mentioned that every sentence or words or argument cannot be reproduced in the order. Only cumulative effect will have to be mentioned in the order as per the ratio laid down in the case of CIT Vs. Karam C Thapar [176 ITR 535 SC]. Similar views were expressed in the case of Raas Bihari Bansal Vs. CIT [293 1TR 365 (Del)]. 9. In the light of our discussion and by considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that Rectification of Mistake application is misuse of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
