TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court grants waiver & stay on liability for 'commercial training/coaching'. Exemption upheld under Notification No. 24/2004-ST.</h1> <h3>Rosalind Mediretta Institutional Foundation Versus CCE. & ST., New Delhi</h3> Rosalind Mediretta Institutional Foundation Versus CCE. & ST., New Delhi - 2016 (46) S.T.R. 168 (Tri. - Del.) Issues:1. Waiver of pre-deposit and stay of realization of adjudicated liability.2. Liability of the petitioner for service tax related to commercial training or coaching.3. Claim of exemption under Notification No. 24/2004-ST.4. Interpretation of law regarding recognition of courses or instructions provided.5. Misdirection by the adjudicating authority in interpreting exemption criteria.6. Fundamental fallacy in reasoning process applied by the adjudicating authority.Analysis:1. The judgment revolves around the waiver of pre-deposit and stay of realization of the adjudicated liability concerning the liability of the petitioner for providing taxable 'commercial training or coaching' under specific sections of the Finance Act, 1994. The liability is assessed for two distinct periods based on the issuance of certificates recognized by law from different institutions.2. The petitioner claimed exemption from tax liability under Section 65(105) (zzc) of the Act, citing Notification No.24/2004-ST, asserting that the services provided fell under the exempted category of vocational training. The argument extended to the subsequent period, emphasizing the issuance of recognized degrees or certificates, which, according to the petitioner, excluded them from the definition of a 'commercial training or coaching centre.'3. The adjudicating authority erred in its interpretation by focusing on the recognition of courses or instructions rather than the degrees or certificates issued. Additionally, a misconception arose regarding the applicability of exemption benefits for vocational training based on the nature of the degree granted, leading to an incorrect assessment by the authority.4. The judgment identifies a fundamental flaw in the reasoning process adopted by the adjudicating authority for both periods under consideration. It acknowledges the petitioner's strong case for appeal and, based on this assessment, grants a full waiver of pre-deposit and stays further proceedings for realizing the adjudicated liability until the appeals are resolved, thus concluding the matter in favor of the petitioner.
TaxTMI 