TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (8) TMI 712
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., training and consultancy. The Institute is also recognized as a centre for post graduate research by the University of Pune and by the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research. The appellant conducted a number of training programs for the officials of various banks and also a post-graduate diploma programme for students in banking management. The appellant charged lumpsum amount for conducting these programmes from the participants or their sponsors. The department was of the view that the service rendered by the appellant came under the category of 'Commercial Training or Coaching' and accordingly a show cause notice dated 06/04/2009 was issued demanding service tax of Rs.3,58,38,984/- on a gross amount of consideration received of Rs.30,72,93,330/- during the period 01/10/2003 to 30/09/2008. The notice was adjudicated vide the impugned order and the demands were confirmed along with interest thereon. However, the adjudicating authority waived the penalties proposed in the show cause notice under Sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. Aggrieved of the said order the appellant is before us. 3. The learned consultant for the appellant made the following submissi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....65 and in clauses (26), (27) and (90a) of Section 65 shall include: "any centre or Institute, by whatever name called, where training or coaching is imparted for consideration, whether or not such centre or institute is registered as a trust or a society or similar other organisation under any law for the time being in force and carrying on its activity with or without profit motive and the expression "commercial training or coaching" shall be construed accordingly." 4.1 Accordingly, he contends that whether the organization imparting the coaching or training makes profit or not, or is a non-profit organization, is not relevant for the purpose of levy of service tax. If the training or coaching is imparted for a consideration, service tax levy is attracted. Only the coaching or training imparted which is recognized under law is excluded from the purview of service tax. In the appellant's case, it is an undisputed fact that the various training programmes organized by the appellant were not recognized by or under any law. Therefore, the activity undertaken by the appellant is leviable to service tax. He relies on the decision of this Tribunal, in the case of ICFAI, Hy....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y with or without profit motive and the expression "commercial training or coaching" shall be construed accordingly." 5.3 From the retrospective amendment cited above, it is clear that any centre or institute, by whatever name called, where training or coaching is imparted for a consideration is liable to service tax. There is no dispute in the present case that the appellant herein is charging for the training programmes/courses conducted by them. It is also an accepted fact that courses conducted by the appellant were not recognized by law during the relevant period. 5.4 The view taken by this Tribunal in the case of ICFAI [2009(14) STR 220 (Tri-Bang)] and Indian School of Business ( ISB in short) reported in 2010 (17) STR 83 (Tri-Bang) was that imparting knowledge and conducting courses at higher level such as post graduate level cannot be termed as commercial training or coaching centre irrespective of whether the degrees so offered were recognized by law or not. In these cases, it was further held that since the institutions were registered under Societies Registration Act for educational purpose (in the case of ICFAI) and was a non-profit company (in the case of ISB), their....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nbsp; - any centre or institute, by whatever name called, - where training or coaching is imparted for consideration, with or without profit motive - whether or not such centre or institute is registered as a trust or a society or similar other organization under any law for the time being in force. Certain aspects which, before the above amendment, were material to consideration of the question whether a given centre or institute would fit in the definition of "commercial training or coaching centre" under Section 65(27) and whether its activities would fit in the defintion of "commercial training or coaching" under Section 65(26) have been rendered immaterial by the amendment. Whether or not the centre or institute is registered as a trust or a society or a similar organization under any law is immaterial now. The name of the centre or institute is immaterial. Whether the activity of the centre or institute is with or without profit motive is also immaterial. Upon the above amendment, what matter is whether the centre or institute has imparted training or coachi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ht under control and become fruitful is called education. As rightly submitted by the learned Special Consultant, education can be seen as the result of study, instruction, training, coaching etc. and the websites of at least two "ICFAI" varsities have been shown to acknowledge this. Therefore a line cannot be drawn to separate "education" from "training or coaching". It is also pertinent to note that Section 65(27) as it stood during the period of dispute excludes institutes/establishments which issue any certificate or diploma or degree or any "educational qualification" recognized by law for the time being in force. The converse of this would be that institutes/establishments which do not issue any certificate or diploma or degree or any "educational qualification" recognized by law for the time being in force as well as institutes/establishments which issue certificates/diplomas/degrees/educational qualifications not recognized by law stand included in the definition of "commercial training or coaching centre" under Section 65(27) of the Act. Institutes and establishments issuing educational qualifications can certainly be called educational institutions. But the ICFAI entities....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... conspectus of facts presented to us would clearly disclose the real character of the assesses "activity" training or coaching for a consideration. 16. It was argued by he learned counsel that the ICFAI Universities, Dehradun and Tripura, were established under the respective State Acts and recognized by the UGC and should ipso factor be considered to be establishments authorized to issue certificates, degrees etc. Though it is true that these universities were, by UGC's notification, included in the list of private/self-financed universities under Section 2(f) of the UGC Act, there is no evidence of any of them having issued any certificate, diploma, degree or other educational qualification to the students from whom they collected fees and other charges during the period of dispute. It was not even shown that these so-called universities were authorized, by or under the State Acts, to issue certificates/ diplomas/degrees/other educational qualifications to the students. It was claimed that the certificates, degrees, etc. were issued to the students by these universities I the name of "ICFAI UNIVERSITY". We have already rejected this claim as untenable, given the fac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....efore us, the decision of the co-ordinate bench at Bangalore is binding on us and therefore, we cannot take a contrary view. 6. In view of the above, we hold that the activity undertaken by the appellant falls within the definition of 'commercial coaching or training' as defined in Section 65(105)(zzc) of the said Finance Act. 7. The next issue for consideration is whether the demand is hit by time-bar. 7.1 The show cause notice has been issued on 06/04/2009 demanding service tax for the period 01/10/2003 to 13/09/2008. The evidence available on record indicates that the matter had been enquired into by the Pune-III Commissionerate and the department was aware of the activities undertaken by the appellant and the department was also of the view that the said activity does not come under the category of 'commercial or training or coaching'. Further during the impugned period, there were a number of decisions by various benches of the Tribunal which also took the same view. However, in view of the amendment made in the Finance Act, 2010, the law underwent a change consequent to which the activity undertaken by the appellant became taxable. In such circumstances, there cannot be an....