2017 (3) TMI 249

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Iyer, Superintendent (AR) for the respondent Order The Mahratta Chamber of Commerce, Industries and Agriculture (MCCIA), Pune challenges the modified demand of tax of Rs. 24,12,484/- under Finance Act, 1994 along with interest thereon in order-in-appeal no. PIII/RP/264/2012 dated 27^th November 2012 of Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals-III), Pune. Appellant has been subjected to tax a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the Learned Authorized Representative. 4. Appellant, admittedly, conducts training programmes and the definition of the taxable activity in section 65 (26) and (27) is specific in its exclusions, as is the explanation incorporated in section 65 (105) (zzc). The training programmes conducted by the appellant are liable to tax. 5. Appellant is a public body that is without profit motive. Th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the extended period is not liable to be invoked. The demand is, consequently, restricted to the normal period of limitation. 6. Appellant contends that there has been an error in computation of taxable value. It is established that the assessable value has been derived from the financial statements. While these records may reveal revenues from rendering of taxable services and may well be a gen....