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>Appellate Tribunal rules in favor of Government-aided institute on taxability of student placement fees</h1> <h3>Sydenham Institute of Management Versus Commissioner of Central Excise</h3> The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai ruled in favor of the appellant, a Government-aided institute, in a case concerning the taxability of placement fees ... Taxability - Amount collected as placement fees from students - Held that:- the issue is no more res integra. In view of the judgment of Tribunal in the case of Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology v. Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Allahabad [2015 (8) TMI 1138 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD], the amount collected as placement fees from students is not taxable. The impugned order is set aside. - Decided in favour of appellant with consequential relief Issues: Taxability of amount collected as placement fees under Manpower Recruitment and Supply Agency Services.The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai dealt with the issue of taxability of the amount collected by the appellant from students as placement fees under Manpower Recruitment and Supply Agency Services. The revenue authorities contended that the amount was taxable, leading to the imposition of service tax liability, interest, and penalties. The appellant, a Government-aided institute conducting management courses, argued that the fees collected were to cover expenses for organizing campus interviews. They cited a previous Tribunal case where a similar demand was set aside in favor of the assessee. The Tribunal examined the case law and found that the issue was no longer res integra. The demand was solely on the placement fees collected by the appellant. Referring to the judgment in the previous case, the Tribunal highlighted the definition of manpower recruitment or supply agency service, emphasizing that the taxable service involved the recruitment or supply of manpower to a client, who must be an employer or prospective employer. Since the placement charges were collected from students and not employers, the service did not fall within the purview of the taxable service as defined. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal with any consequential relief. The judgment was delivered by Member (Judicial) M. V. Ravindran.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
