9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (5) TMI 670 - AT - Service TaxCommercial training and coaching centre services - N/N. 9/2003 - Scope of degree - whether degrees provided by universities or institutes to which the college is affiliated and the completion reports leads to issuance of a degree? - Circular No. DOF/334/1/2010-TRU dated 26.02.2010 - Held that - the college cannot be said to be providing commercial training or coaching service since such degree will be recognised by law for time being in force. The CBEC circular has kept the institutions which are providing courses that lead to award of recognised diplomas, degrees and sport education out of the tax net, The Circular would apply in its full force in respect of these cases in hand as we have seen the various certificates and degrees issued, name of the universities being included in the IJGC maintained list of universities and the universities have been established under the respective State Acts. The certificates issued by the appellants are under the law recognised by the State Acts, the Board circular would cover the matter in favor of these appellants. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues Involved:
1. Classification of ICFAI and its affiliates as commercial training and coaching centers. 2. Eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 9/2003-ST and Notification No. 24/2004-ST. 3. Recognition of degrees and certificates issued by ICFAI under the UGC Act and respective State Acts. 4. Applicability of Board Circular No. DOF/334/1/2010-TRU dated 26.02.2010. 5. Impact of previous Tribunal and High Court decisions on the current case. Detailed Analysis: 1. Classification of ICFAI and Its Affiliates as Commercial Training and Coaching Centers: The primary issue was whether ICFAI and its affiliates should be classified as commercial training and coaching centers. The adjudicating authority had previously confirmed this classification, denying the benefit of exemption notifications. The appellant argued that their institutions were established under State Acts and recognized by the UGC, thus falling outside the definition of commercial training and coaching centers. The Tribunal noted that the universities were recognized under respective State Acts and included in the UGC list, which supports the appellant's claim that they are educational bodies and not commercial training centers. 2. Eligibility for Exemption Under Notification No. 9/2003-ST and Notification No. 24/2004-ST: The appellant contended that they were eligible for exemptions under Notification No. 9/2003-ST and Notification No. 24/2004-ST. The Tribunal referred to previous decisions, including the Final Order No. 31654-31657/2017, which extended these exemptions to the appellant for the period 2003-05. The Tribunal found that the same rationale applied to the current period (2006-2011), and thus, the appellant was eligible for these exemptions until 27.02.2010. Post 27.02.2010, the definition of services covered the appellant's case, further supporting their eligibility for exemption. 3. Recognition of Degrees and Certificates Issued by ICFAI Under the UGC Act and Respective State Acts: The Tribunal examined whether the degrees and certificates issued by ICFAI were recognized by law. The appellant provided evidence that their universities were established under State Acts and recognized by the UGC. The Tribunal found that the certificates issued by the appellant were indeed recognized by law, as they were approved by the respective State Acts and included in the UGC list. This recognition exempted the appellant from being classified as a commercial training and coaching center. 4. Applicability of Board Circular No. DOF/334/1/2010-TRU Dated 26.02.2010: The Tribunal considered the applicability of Circular No. DOF/334/1/2010-TRU, which clarified that institutions providing courses leading to recognized diplomas or degrees were not subject to service tax. The Tribunal found that this circular applied to the appellant's case, as their institutions were recognized by the UGC and provided recognized degrees and diplomas. This further supported the appellant's claim for exemption from service tax. 5. Impact of Previous Tribunal and High Court Decisions on the Current Case: The Tribunal reviewed previous decisions, including those of the High Court of Delhi and other Tribunal benches, which supported the appellant's position. These decisions established that institutions recognized by law and providing recognized degrees were not subject to service tax under the category of commercial training and coaching centers. The Tribunal found that these precedents applied to the appellant's case, reinforcing their eligibility for exemption. Conclusion: The Tribunal concluded that the appellant's institutions were recognized by law and provided recognized degrees, thus exempting them from service tax under the category of commercial training and coaching centers. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were allowed. The Tribunal's decision was based on the recognition of the appellant's institutions under State Acts and the UGC, the applicability of exemption notifications, and the support of previous judicial decisions.
|
