Tax Management India. Com
                        Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...

Category of Documents

TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts Notifications Circulars Classification Forms Manuals SMS News Articles
Highlights
D. Forum
What's New

Share:      

        Home        
 

TMI Blog

Home List
← Previous Next →

2018 (7) TMI 863

to indicate the salary received by Prof. Thomas and the cost of the study material, it is found that the SCN itself has categorically stated these amounts differently. - It is for the Department to show that the cost of materials is not separately shown and that the professional charges were not towards the classes conducted by the respondent in M/s/ Chaithanya Classes; the Order-in-Original wants the respondents to prove the otherwise - having accepted that fact; the same cannot be included in the value of the taxable service in terms of the Notification No. 12/2003- Service Tax; therefore, we find that the demand on this count is not sustainable. - Salary or remuneration received by the respondent - Held that:- Neither the SCN nor .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

he study material. The total value of the service from 01.07.2003 to 31.03.2005 was ₹ 1,42,86,080/- which included value of study material of ₹ 1,40,72,600/-. A SCN was issued that these amounts received by the respondents were not included for the purpose of payment of Service Tax and a SCN dated 31.01.2006, demanding Service Tax of ₹ 12,02,886/- and education cess of ₹ 6000/- seeking to levy interest and penalty under Section 75,78 and 76 of Finance Act, 1994 was issued, the Joint Commissioner vide Order No. 15/2006 dated 27.06.2006 has confirmed the demands and penalties proposed. On an appeal made by the appellants, Commissioner (A) has allowed the appellant with consequential relief. The Department has filed the .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

has been produced to support the argument that the materials given to M/s. Chaithanya Classes have been exclusively prepared by Prof. P.C. Thomas himself in the absence of any documentary proof to this effect as the details are not forthcoming in the Service Tax returns invocation of proviso to Section 73 is justified. 4. The counsel for the appellant has submitted that the amounts received by Prof. P.C. Thomas was under two categories i.e. the salary for the classes fee has taken in M/s. Chaithanya Classes and the cost of the books/study materials supplied by him, they are separately shown; they also relied upon the judgment of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Cerebral Learing Solutions Pvt. Ltd. 2013(32) STR 379 (Tri. Delhi) wh .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

amount of ₹ 1,42,72,600/- was for the value of the study materials. By no such of an imagination, having accepted that fact; the same cannot be included in the value of the taxable service in terms of the Notification No. 12/2003- Service Tax; therefore, we find that the demand on this count is not sustainable. 8. Coming to the salary or remuneration received by the respondent, we find that neither the SCN nor the Order-in-Original give a categorical finding or evidence to show that the respondent s contention on this count is wrong. In fact, it was for the Department to show proof to that extent rather than going by the premise that the respondents have not shown any proof to that effect. Since the Department has made the allegation .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →

 

 

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || Database || Members || Refer Us ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.
|| Blog || Site Map - Recent || Site Map ||