9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 1083X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... service rendered in the preceding half-years. For instance, while calculating the taxable value for the half-year October 2003 to March 2004, the total amount of fees collected from the students for that half-year less refunds made to the students in the succeeding half-year was adopted as taxable value. If that be so, it is incomprehensible from the impugned order as to why the refunds to studen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te. What is disputed is the quantum of the demand. According to the appellant, the total amount of service tax and education cess payable by them for the said period is only Rs. 66,694/-. They have calculated this amount by excluding from taxable value certain amounts of fees refunded to their students (service recipient) after March 2006. The total amount of fees so refunded by the appellant is R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the taxable value of the service provided in the previous half-year (October 2005 to March 2006). 2. The appellant has also pleaded limitation against a part of the impugned demand of tax, but I have not found prima facie case on this ground. The plea of financial hardships raised in the present application has not been substantiated. 3. In the result, there will be a direction to the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
