9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 1097X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y them would not attract Service Tax under Section 65(105)(zzc). These training programmes enable the trainees to seek employment or undertake self-employment directly after such training and, hence, the appellant for the purpose of this notification have to be treated as “vocational training institute” and they would be covered by the exemption N/N. 24/2004-S.T. - service tax demand not sustainable. As regards the Service Tax demand of ₹ 6,09,621/-, this Service Tax demand is on the amount received by the appellant from CIDC for development of cost index and upgradation of cost data base and costing software of ONGC - it would not be correct to charge Service Tax once again from the appellant on the amount received by them when on the same amount ONGC have paid the Service Tax - demand set aside. As regards the Service Tax demand of ₹ 41,668/- on alleged renting of immovable property by the appellant company - as it is not disputed that the renting of the property was for commercial purposes, demand confirmed. Appeal disposed off - decided partly in favor of appellant. - ST/57371/2013 - Stay Order No. ST/S/52837/2014-CU(DB) - Dated:- 22-8-2014 - Ms. Arch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by CIDC from ONGC. While CIDC paid service on the full amount received by them from ONGC and recovered the same from ONGC, the Department was of the view that the appellant would also be liable to pay Service Tax under Consulting Engineer s Service under Section 65(105) (g) read with Section 65(31) of the Finance Act, 1994 on the amount received by them from CIDC. Service Tax demand of ₹ 6,09,621/- is on this basis. 1.3 It was also found that during period from 2006-2007 and 2008-2009, the appellant had received an amount of ₹ 4,04,540/- as rent from renting of an immovable property for commercial purposes and Service Tax amounting to ₹ 41,668/- payable on the amount of rent had not paid by them. Service Tax demand of ₹ 41,668/- is on this basis. 1.4 It is in view of the above Investigation that a show cause notice dated 22-10-2011 was issued to the appellant for - (a) demand of Service Tax along with education cess and secondary and higher education cess totalling ₹ 1,23,53,726/- from the appellant company under proviso to Section 73(1) of Finance Act, 1994 along with interest thereon under Section 75 ibid; and (b) imposition of penalty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le by the appellant on the amount received by them from CIDC, that even if the Service Tax is charged from the appellant on the amount received by them from CIDC, CIDC would be eligible for its Cenvat credit which could be utilized by them for payment of Service Tax on the amount received by them from ONGC and it would be a revenue neutral exercise, that in any case charging Service Tax both from CIDC and from the appellant company would amount to double taxation, that in view of this, confirmation of Service Tax demand on the amount received by the appellant from CIDC for development of cost index and upgradation of cost data for ONGC is not correct, that as regards Service Tax demand of ₹ 41,668/- on renting of immovable property, this Service Tax is not chargeable under Section 65(105)(zzzz) inasmuch as the property let out by the appellant was not owned by them, that in view of the above, the impugned order is not correct, that the appellant have a strong prima facie case in their favour and, hence, the requirement of pre-deposit of Service Tax demand, interest thereon and penalty may be waived for hearing of their appeal and recovery thereof may be stayed. 4. Shri Gov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs. The fees from the workers was collected by CIDC and passed on to the appellant. The courses organized by the appellant result in issue of certificates which are recognized by IGNOU. In terms of Section 65(105)(zzc) of Finance Act, 1994, the service provided to any person by a commercial training or coaching centre in relation to commercial or coaching is taxable. In terms of Section 65(27) as the same stood during the period of dispute, the term commercial training or coaching centre means any institute or establishment providing commercial training or coaching for imparting skill or knowledge or lessons on any subject or field other than sports with or without issuance of a certificate and includes coaching or tutorial classes, but does not include pre-school coaching and training centre or any institute or establishment which issues any certificate or diploma or degree or any educational qualification recognized by law for the time being in force. The exclusion clause in the definition of commercial training or coaching centre in Section 65(27) was deleted by Finance Act, 2011 w.e.f. 8-4-2011. Thus, during the period of dispute, the term commercial training or coaching c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ftware of ONGC. CIDC had entered into an agreement with ONGC for development of cost index and upgradation of cost data base and costing software and there is no dispute that CIDC have paid Service Tax on the full amount received by them from ONGC. The CIDC, however, sub-contracted this job to the appellant and the appellant in terms of their agreement with CIDC, received 90% of the amount received by CIDC from ONGC. Service Tax is being demanded on the amount received by the appellant from CIDC. Since CIDC have paid Service Tax on the full amount received by them from ONGC, but instead of doing the job themselves sub-contracted this job to the appellant for which they paid 90% of the amount received from ONGC to the appellant, in our prima facie view, it would not be correct to charge Service Tax once again from the appellant on the amount received by them when on the same amount ONGC have paid the Service Tax. Thus, on this point the appellant have prima facie case in their favour. 9. As regards the Service Tax demand of ₹ 41,668/- on alleged renting of immovable property by the appellant company, Prima facie the appellant s contention that the immovable property rented ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
