Exemption notifications for computer training services led taxability, while genuine uncertainty over liability led to deletion of penalty.

Exemption notifications governing computer training and coaching services applied to the relevant period, so service tax was not sustainable for the portion of the demand falling within the exempted window. Later changes to the exemption regime did not apply retrospectively to that period, so any demand outside the exemption had to be tested only against the applicable notification structure. Where the record showed genuine confusion over taxability during the relevant time, penalty was not justified. The result was partial maintenance of the tax demand, with penalties deleted.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the demand of service tax on computer training services was sustainable for the relevant period in view of the exemption notifications; (ii) Whether penalty was leviable when there was confusion regarding taxability.

Issue (i): Whether the demand of service tax on computer training services was sustainable for the relevant period in view of the exemption notifications.

Analysis: The relevant notifications exempted computer training and coaching services provided by a computer training institute from 01.07.2003 to 30.06.2004. The subsequent notifications modified the exemption position only thereafter. On the facts recorded, the disputed demand fell within the exempted period, while the later change in exemption was not applicable to that period.

Conclusion: The demand of service tax was not sustainable for the exempted period, and the confirmation of demand was upheld only to the extent supported by the notification regime.

Issue (ii): Whether penalty was leviable when there was confusion regarding taxability.

Analysis: The record reflected confusion during the relevant period about the taxability of the services. In such a situation, the penal consequence was not considered justified, even though the demand aspect was not wholly interfered with.

Conclusion: The penalties were set aside in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appeals were allowed only in part: the tax demand was maintained to the extent held payable, while the penalties were deleted.

Ratio Decidendi: Where exemption notifications clearly govern the relevant period, tax liability must be decided by the notification regime, and penalty is not warranted when taxability was genuinely uncertain.

---