2008 (1) TMI 116 - AT - Service Tax

Testing of software during its development & training customers in software revenue proceeded to cover both services under head Technical Inspection & Certification Service & Commercial Training & Coaching Service respectively testing is done during development of software so software engineering is not taxable under impugned head secondly, computer training became taxable w.e.f. 15.6.05 so demand of tax for disputed period is not justified no suppression, demand time barred

Summary

Issues:
Service Tax on software testing under "Technical Inspection & Certification Service" and Service Tax on computer training under "Commercial Training and Coaching Service."

Analysis:

Software Testing under "Technical Inspection & Certification Service":
The appeal was against an Order-in-Original passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax, Bangalore, demanding Service Tax from a software development company for testing services. The appellant argued that software testing is an integral part of software development and, therefore, exempt from Service Tax. They highlighted that software engineering is exempt from Service Tax and distinguished their case from a previous judgment regarding 'canned' software. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant, stating that software testing, being an integral part of software development, cannot be taxed under Technical Inspection & Certification Service. The demand for Service Tax on software testing was set aside.

Computer Training under "Commercial Training and Coaching Service":
Regarding Service Tax on computer training, the appellant argued that they were exempt from taxation during a specific period due to a notification. They also contended that there was no evidence of evasion and confusion in the tax laws, making the demand time-barred. The Tribunal acknowledged the exemption period and the appellant's compliance with tax regulations. They found no grounds for invoking a longer period for tax demand due to lack of evidence of evasion. Consequently, the demand for Service Tax on computer training was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with any consequential relief.

In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the Service Tax demands on both software testing and computer training, citing exemptions and lack of evidence for tax evasion.