2015 (9) TMI 883 - AT - Service Tax

Commercial Coaching or Training - Held that - Demand of service tax was raised under the category of Commercial Coaching or Training service for the period 1.4.2003 - 31.3.2006. The show cause notice was issued on 19.9.2006 and the appellant had not seriously challenged the issue of limitation and exemption notification before the Adjudicating Authority, which can be raised before the Appellate Authority. In our considered view, as the issues were not raised before the Adjudicating Authority, the appellant should be given an opportunity to raise the issue before the Adjudicating authority in the interest of justice. - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge to Tribunal order by Revenue before Supreme Court.
2. Demand of service tax under "Commercial Coaching or Training" service.
3. Contesting tax demand on various issues and eligibility for exemption notification.
4. Time-barred exemption notification and limitation challenge.
5. Need for raising issues before Adjudicating Authority.
6. Remand of the matter to Adjudicating Authority for fresh decision.

Analysis:
1. The judgment involves the challenge of the Tribunal order by the Revenue before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, in Civil Appeal No 86879 of 2009, set aside the Tribunal order and directed a fresh examination of the case in light of the Explanation inserted in the Act. The Supreme Court emphasized that all arising issues could be decided by the Tribunal afresh.

2. The demand of service tax was raised under the category of "Commercial Coaching or Training" service for a specific period. The appellant contested the tax demand on various merits and claimed eligibility for exemption under the category of "Vocational Training and Coaching Services." The issue of limitation and exemption notification was not seriously challenged before the Adjudicating Authority, prompting the Tribunal to remand the matter for a fresh decision.

3. The Tribunal noted that the appellant should be given an opportunity to raise the issues of exemption notification and limitation before the Adjudicating Authority in the interest of justice. As these issues were not raised previously, it was deemed necessary to provide the appellant with a chance to present their case before the Adjudicating Authority.

4. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for a fresh decision in accordance with the law. The Adjudicating Authority was directed to consider the submissions of the appellants on merit and limitations, ensuring a proper opportunity for a hearing before making a decision. The appeal was allowed by way of remand, emphasizing the importance of due process and a fair hearing.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues involved, the decisions made by the Tribunal, and the directions given for a fresh examination of the case by the Adjudicating Authority.