9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 459X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eties Registration Act, 1860, who conducts various management courses. 3. On 10th February, 2006, the Directorate General Central Excise Intelligence issued a Show Cause Notice to the appellant alleging that the appellant was evading the payment of Service Tax on the fees collected for the various academic and training courses under the category of "Commercial Training and Coaching Services". 4. The Show Cause Notice was finally adjudicated by the respondent vide Order-in-Original dated 24th January, 2012, by Commissioner, Service Tax Commissionerate, New Delhi, confirming the demand of Service Tax, along with interest and penalties to the extent of Rs. 8,08,000/-. 5. Consequently, post the order of review preferred by the appellant-assessee, the Respondent preferred an appeal before the CESTAT, while the appellant-assessee filed its cross-objections against the confirmation of demand. 6. It is averred that during the course of arguments before the CESTAT, the revenue and the appellant-assessee submitted their written statements on 8th and 12th March, 2018 respectively, and on the 20th March, 2018 the appeal by the revenue was allowed by the CESTAT, to the extent of the dropped ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nable. We set aside the impugned order to the extent of dropping of Service Tax demand and uphold the entire demand of Service Tax raised in the show cause notice dated 10/02/2006. Such demand will be payable along with interest under Section 75. IIPM will also be liable to pay penalty equal to the Service Tax demanded under Section 78 as well as under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. Since penalty under Section 78 is upheld, we do not impose penalty under Section 76." (Emphasis supplied) 8. Aggrieved by the observation of the CESTAT in the final order dated 20th March, 2018 that the plea invoking the extension of time period had not be taken since it was neither contended before the adjudicating authority nor the CESTAT, the appellant-assessee preferred a rectification of mistake application, under Section 35C of the Central Excise Act, 1944, on 13th September, 2018. 9. This rectification of mistake application was dismissed by the CESTAT vide the impugned order dated 8th March, 2019, while holding that the scope of rectification of mistake was limited. The findings of the CESTAT merit reproduction as under: "7. By means of this ROM, the appellant has advanced detailed ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellants and Mr. Amit Bansal, Senior Standing counsel for the respondent. 13. Mr. Sumit Wadhwa, learned counsel for the appellants has made a pointed submission, detailing the numerous instances where the appellant has raised the contention of extended period of limitation at the various stages of adjudication. The appellants have summarized the instances in their pleadings as follows: "S. No. Nature of document Relevant para no. Relevant page no. (internal) Extract of the relevant portion 1. Show cause notice 1 1 M/s. THE INDIAN INSTITUTE OF PLANNING & MANAGEMENT, a society registered under the Societies' Registration Act, 1860, having institute/branch at IIPM TOWERS, 145, RUKMANI, LAKSHMIPATHY SAL AI (MARSHALL'S ROAD), EGMORE, CHENNAI- 600008 and Head Office and Institute at IIPM towers, B- 27, Qutub International Area, NEW DELHI- 110016. 2. Show cause notice 3.4 2 3.4 M/s. IIPM vide their Letter dated 05/09/2005,addressed to the Assistant Director, DGCEI, Chennai stated, inter alia, that they furnished a copy of Letter dt.25/7/2005 of M/s. Amarchand & Mangaldas & Suresh Shroff & CO., counsel for IIPM, addressed to the Superintendent, Commissionerat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peared to reveal the following: (a) IIPM, is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, are engaged in conducting various academic educational courses 6. Order-in-Original dt. 24.01.2012 4 M/s. THE INDIAN INSTITUTE OF PLANNING & MANAGEMENT, a society registered under the Societies' Registration Act, 1860, *having institute/branch at IIPM TOWERS, 145, RUKMANI, LAKSHMIPATHY SAL AI (MARSHALL'S ROAD), EGMORE, CHENNAI - 600008 and Head Office and Institute at IIPM towers, B- 27, Qutub International Area, NEW DELHI-110016. 7. Order-in-Original dt. 24.01.2012 3.4 5 3.4 :M/s. IIPM vide their Letter dated 05/09/2005,addressed to the Assistant Director, DGCEI, Chennai stated, inter alia, that they furnished a copy of Letter dt.25/7/2005 of M/s. Amarchand & Mangaldas & Suresh Shroff & CO., counsel for IIPM, addressed to the Superintendent, Commissionerate of the service tax, Bangalore, wherein they stated that IIPM is a non-profit making Educational Institute registered Under the Societies' Registration Act, 1860 to impart training and research on Techno Economic and Socio-Economic Planning and Management; that IIPM teaches Planning and en ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ovided as a business, activity i.e.for the purpose of making profit. The evidence on record fails not only to prove that IIPM are not engaged in providing coaching or training, it also fails to show the activities of IIPM are directed towards profit making. It is on record that IIPM is a society Registered under Section 10 (23C) of the Income Tax Act. Under Section 10 (23 C) exemption is available to educational institutions existing solely for education purposes and not for the purpose of profit. 11. Order-in-Original dt. 24.01.2012 17.8 65 The admitted facts on record by both the department and the Noticee are as follows:- The Noticee is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 having branch offices at several locations and Head Office in New Delhi. 12. Order-in-Original dt. 24.01.2012 Viii 66 That the Noticee is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and is conducting private courses. The notice was established in 1973 as non-profit making educational institute under the said Act." 14. Arguing per contra, Mr. Amit Bansal, learned Senior Standing counsel for the respondent, vehemently contends that the scope of rectifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
