Prima facie waiver of pre-deposit granted where tax was already paid on commission and worker training was not commercial coaching.

Prima facie waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery were granted where the appellant showed that service tax had already been discharged on the full commission in the hands of the principal service provider, making the further demand on the sub-agent arguable, and that training conducted for its own workers was not commercial coaching or training for the general public. The tribunal treated both grounds as sufficient at the interim stage to justify unconditional protection from recovery pending appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in respect of the service tax demand and penalties confirmed against it.

Analysis: The demand arose from two components: services rendered as a sub-agent of a corporate agent and certain coaching and training activities for the appellant's own workers. At the interim stage, the tribunal found prima facie support for the appellant's contention that tax had already been discharged on the full commission received by the corporate agent and that the further demand on the sub-agent was not justified. It also found prima facie merit in the submission that training conducted for the appellant's own workers was not the same as commercial coaching or training provided to the general public.

Conclusion: The appellant was held entitled to unconditional waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery during the pendency of the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the assessee shows a prima facie case that service tax has already been discharged on the full commission in the hands of the principal service provider and that the activity in question is not aimed at the general public, pre-deposit and recovery can be stayed.

---