9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (2) TMI 66X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 9-10-2007 dismissing the appeal of the appellant for non-compliance of the order dated 30-8-2007. By the said order dated 30-8-2007 the appellant was directed to pre-deposit a sum of Rs. 22,96,593/- in terms of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act as condition for admission of the appeal and as the appellant failed to d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Appeals) for decision on merits on the appellant's depositing the amount, which it was directed to deposit, as mentioned above and with which we do not propose to interfere. Nevertheless, in fairness to the appellant, we wish to record a brief speaking order as under: 3. The dispute relates to Service Tax. The appellant claims to be sponsors of Universities situated in a few States imparting ed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed back for the same purpose, and it cannot be treated as commercial training or coaching centre and, therefore, it is not amenable to Service Tax. 4. The Additional Commissioner in the impugned order found that the appellant has a vast network of centres situated across the country including the one at Jaipur which collect huge amounts as fees. The amount which the appellant is said to have rece ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egedly utilized by the appellant is not relevant. If the amount is charged and collected at the centres established by the appellant, it cannot escape the liability to pay Service Tax. 6. We are of the view that the dispute involves examination of records but unfortunately the Commissioner (Appeals) do not go into the merits of this case as the appellant did not pre-deposit the amount. We do not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
