https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78706 SC held that Notification No. 24/2004-ST dated 10.09.2004, granting exemption to "vocational" and "recreational" training institutes, did not cover computer training institutes, which had been specifically excluded, and this exclusion was deliberate. The subsequent amendment dated 16.06.2005, adding a proviso regarding computer training, was treated as clarificatory but effective only prospectively from 16.06.2005. Consequently, computer training institutes remained liable to pay service tax for the period 10.09.2004 to 15.06.2005. The appeal by the revenue was allowed and the contrary view of the HC was reversed, restoring the tax demand for the disputed period. en-us Mon, 13 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Nov 2025 13:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78706 SC held that Notification No. 24/2004-ST dated 10.09.2004, granting exemption to "vocational" and "recreational" training institutes, did not cover computer training institutes, which had been specifically excluded, and this exclusion was deliberate. The subsequent amendment dated 16.06.2005, adding a proviso regarding computer training, was treated as clarificatory but effective only prospectively from 16.06.2005. Consequently, computer training institutes remained liable to pay service tax for the period 10.09.2004 to 15.06.2005. The appeal by the revenue was allowed and the contrary view of the HC was reversed, restoring the tax demand for the disputed period. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 13 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78706