TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the demand relating to Abacus, Handwriting and Vedic Maths training required reconsideration for grant of small scale service provider exemption; (ii) Whether penalties could be sustained on the appellant for the service tax demands relating to Abacus and English Language training.
Issue (i): Whether the demand relating to Abacus, Handwriting and Vedic Maths training required reconsideration for grant of small scale service provider exemption.
Analysis: The disputed turnover and the eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 06/2005-ST, as amended by Notification No. 33/2012-ST, depended on factual verification by the adjudicating authority. The reduction of the value attributable to Abacus training for the relevant period also had to be examined in the same factual matrix. Since the benefit of the exemption turned on verification of records, the matter was fit for de novo consideration.
Conclusion: The issue was remanded to the adjudicating authority for fresh consideration after following principles of natural justice.
Issue (ii): Whether penalties could be sustained on the appellant for the service tax demands relating to Abacus and English Language training.
Analysis: The taxability of Abacus training was still under consideration before the Supreme Court, and Tribunal decisions had taken the view that such training was not taxable from 2012. As regards English Language training, the Tribunal had already treated it as falling under commercial coaching and training class services. In that background, the appellant's belief regarding non-taxability was held to be bona fide, attracting relief from penalty under section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994.
Conclusion: The penalties relating to Abacus and English Language training were set aside.
Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded to the extent of remand on the exemption issue and deletion of penalties, while the remaining tax issues were left for fresh adjudication by the original authority.
Ratio Decidendi: Where exemption eligibility depends on factual verification, the matter may be remanded for de novo adjudication, and bona fide belief based on prevailing Tribunal views can justify waiver of penalties under section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994.
TaxTMI 
