2011 (4) TMI 626 - AT - Service Tax

Waiver of pre-deposit - Benefit of Notification No.24/2004-ST dated 10.9.2004 and Notification No.9/2003-ST dated 20.6.2003 - Notifications granted full exemption from payment of service tax on the aforesaid service provided by (a) a vocational training institute or (b) a recreational training institute - The appellant claims to be a vocational training institute as defined in the above Notifications. On examination of the averments contained in the present appeal with regard to the activity undertaken by the appellant during the material period, prima facie view that the appellant would fit in the definition of vocational training institute . Prima facie the benefit of exemption under the Notifications is available to them - Hence there will be no requirement of pre-deposit - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Rejection of appeal by appellate Commissioner due to non-compliance with pre-deposit direction.
2. Applicability of Notifications No.24/2004-ST and No.9/2003-ST for exemption from service tax.
3. Dismissal of appeal without examining merits by Commissioner (Appeals).

Analysis:

Issue 1: The appeal was directed against the rejection by the appellate Commissioner based on non-compliance with the pre-deposit direction. The original authority had demanded a significant amount of service tax from the appellant along with penalties. The demand was related to commercial training and coaching services for the period 2003-04 to 2007-08. The appellant failed to deposit the required amount, leading to the dismissal of their appeal.

Issue 2: The appellant claimed entitlement to the benefit of Notification No.24/2004-ST and No.9/2003-ST, which provided full exemption from service tax for vocational training institutes. The Tribunal, after examining the appellant's activities during the relevant period, opined that they qualified as a vocational training institute as per the definitions in the Notifications. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the appellant met the criteria for exemption, eliminating the necessity for pre-deposit.

Issue 3: The Tribunal observed that the Commissioner (Appeals) had dismissed the appellant's appeal without assessing the merits of their case. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the decision and remanded the appeal back to the appellate authority. The Tribunal instructed the authority to review the appeal on its merits without requiring any pre-deposit. The appellant was to be given a fair opportunity to present their case before a final decision was made.

In conclusion, the Tribunal overturned the dismissal of the appellant's appeal, recognizing their potential eligibility for exemption under the relevant Notifications. The case was remanded for a fresh consideration on its merits, emphasizing the importance of providing the appellant with a fair hearing without insisting on any pre-deposit.