Appellant not liable for service tax on government statutory functions and IT education services under departmental circulars

CESTAT Kolkata held that appellant was not liable for service tax on three categories of services. First, services provided to Ministry of Transport constituted statutory government functions, not taxable Business Auxiliary Services under Circular No. 89/7/2006-ST. Second, IT education implementation under Education Department was covered by Circular No. 125/7/2010-ST exempting state agencies implementing centrally sponsored schemes. Third, IT education under Rajiv Gandhi Computer Literacy Programme also fell under the same circular exemption. The adjudicating authority failed to consider relevant departmental circulars despite appellant's citations. Service tax demand, interest, and penalty were set aside. Appeal allowed.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Taxability of services provided to the Ministry of Transport, Govt. of Assam.
2. Taxability of services under the Anandoram Barooah Award Scheme.
3. Taxability of services under the Rajiv Gandhi Computer Literacy Programme.

Summary:

Issue 1: Taxability of Services Provided to the Ministry of Transport, Govt. of Assam
The Appellant argued that the services rendered for issuing Driving Licenses (DL) and Registration Certificates (RC) under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, are statutory functions of the government and not taxable under "Business Auxiliary Service." They cited Circular No. 89/7/2006-ST, which clarifies that fees collected for performing statutory functions deposited into the Government Treasury do not constitute taxable services. The Tribunal agreed, observing that the adjudicating authority did not consider this circular. Consequently, the demand for service tax on this count was set aside.

Issue 2: Taxability of Services under the Anandoram Barooah Award Scheme
The Appellant contended that the services provided under this scheme, aimed at promoting IT education among meritorious students, are not taxable under "Business Auxiliary Service." They referred to Circular No. 125/7/2010-ST, which states that service tax should not be demanded from State Government agencies implementing Centrally Sponsored Schemes under a central grant. The Tribunal found this circular applicable and set aside the service tax demand on this count.

Issue 3: Taxability of Services under the Rajiv Gandhi Computer Literacy Programme
The Appellant argued that the services provided under this Central Government-sponsored scheme are not taxable under "Business Auxiliary Service." They cited the same Circular No. 125/7/2010-ST. The Tribunal agreed, finding the circular applicable and set aside the service tax demand on this count.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal held that the services provided by the Appellant in all three cases were not taxable under the category of "Business Auxiliary Service" based on the cited circulars. Consequently, the demands for service tax, interest, and penalties were set aside. The impugned order was modified accordingly, and the appeal was disposed of on these lines.

---