9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (8) TMI 1465 - AT - Service TaxLevy of tax - amount collected as fees for coaching rendered in teaching the System of Speedy calculation of mathematics called ABACUS - Held that - The identical issue in respect of the same appellant for the subsequent period November, 2007 to September, 2008 is decided in their favour in the case of M/S ABACUS BRAIN STUDY (P) LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS), HYDERABAD 2011 (1) TMI 833 - CESTAT, BANGALORE , where it was held that there is a specific exemption provided for recreational training institute and vocational training institute. In our view, the activities of the appellant would more appropriately be classified as recreational. Service tax not levied - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
- Service Tax liability on fees for coaching in teaching the System of Speedy calculation of mathematics called ABACUS. Analysis: The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT HYDERABAD dealt with an appeal against the Order-in-Appeal regarding the demand of Service Tax liability on the appellant for fees collected for coaching ABACUS. Despite the absence of the appellant, the Tribunal proceeded with the case due to the narrow compass of the issue. The records revealed that a similar issue was decided in favor of the appellant for a subsequent period, which was also under appeal. The Tribunal noted that the identical issue for the appellant was decided in their favor by the Bench for a subsequent period, leading to the conclusion that the impugned order in the current appeal was unsustainable. As a result, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal. The Tribunal emphasized that the issue revolved around the demand of Service Tax liability on the amount collected as fees for coaching in teaching the ABACUS system of speedy calculation of mathematics. The Tribunal referenced a previous decision in the appellant's favor for a subsequent period, indicating consistency in the treatment of the issue. The Tribunal highlighted that the impugned order in the current appeal was unsustainable based on the precedent set by the previous decision in the appellant's own case. Consequently, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal. The decision was based on the principle of consistency in judicial interpretation and application of tax laws, ensuring fairness and justice in the adjudication process.
|
