TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (4) TMI 778
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ecember, 2008 to February, 2011. The Order-in-Appeal has confirmed the demand for the subsequent period March, 2011 to March, 2012. The appellant (PHFI) is registered with the Service Tax Commissionerate for providing services under the category "Commercial Training or Coaching Services" falling under Section 65(105) (zzc) of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant is engaged in providing training to doctors in the field of Diabetes Management in India. They entered into a tripartite agreement (MOU) with M/s MSD Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd (MSD) and Dr Mohan's Diabetic Education Academy (DMDEA). As per the terms of the agreement, MSD will provide periodic funding for the training programme in the form of grant and will separately provide funding t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gued the case of the appellant and his arguments are summarized below: i) MSD has given grant to PHFI as part of their CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility). The appellant is a Not-for Profit Society with a view to champion the cause of Public Health in India. The grant was to provide for funding of the programme and the said disbursement was not in relation to any service provided in the capacity of Commercial Training or Coaching Service. Such grant was meant for organizing the programme and meeting the expenses thereto. ii) The Commercial Training or Coaching Service was provided by PHFI only to the participants. No services were provided at the behest of MSD and hence the grant cannot be considered as consideration for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....p. Ltd Vs Commr. of CE Nagpur.2015 (38) STR 421 (Tri.Mumbai) (c) Madhya Pradesh Consultancy Organization Ltd Vs CCE Bhopal 2017 (4) GSTL 100 (Tri.Del.) A written submission explaining the arguments raised during the hearing was also filed on 23.03.2018. 5. The ld DR justified the impugned orders. He argued that only a part of the cost of training was recovered from the participating doctors @ Rs. 8000/- per participant. The rest of the cost was borne by MSD and reimbursed to PHFI through grant, as per the terms of MOU. 6. In the written submission dated 22.03.2018 Shri Sanjay Jain, DR submitted as follows: "The CBEC Circular No.127/09/2010-ST dated 16.08.2010 specifically covers such situation in Para 2. It specif....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../s MSD in turn is getting its brand promotion amongst 2000 physicians. It is worth here that M/s MSD are a heading Diabetes Medicine manufacturer and the purpose for granting such grant is quit obvious. Further, the case laws relied upon by the Opposing Counsel is involving grant invariably from statutory without any guide pro quo bodies which is not so in the instant case. The grant is provided by the private person to get his brand promoted. Therefore, it is clear that the appellant is liable to pay the Service Tax on the account. A small demand is towards maintenance management and repair services is explained in 28.01 of Order-in-Original, which is very clear and do not require any further elaboration please." 7. The ld DR f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Finance Act, 1994 is reproduced below: "(1) Subject to the provisions of this Chapter, where service tax is chargeable on any taxable service with reference to its value, then such value shall,_ (i) In a case where the provision of service is for a consideration in money, be the gross amount charged by the service provider for such service provided or to be provided by him; (ii) ........ (iii) ........ (2) ........... (3) ........... (4) ........... Explanation: For the purposes of this Section,_ a) "consideration" includes any amount that is payable for the taxable services provided or to be provided; 11. From the above provision, it i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Such a view also finds support from Section 2(d) of the Indian Act, 1872 which defines the term "consideration". There is no doubt that the training imparted to doctors is covered by the category of Commercial Coaching or Training Service. Accordingly, we are inclined to uphold the findings of the lower authorities that Service Tax is liable to be paid under the above category by including the amounts received as grant from MSD. 14. Next, we turn to the demand of Service Tax under the category of Management, Maintenance and Repair service for the grants received from the Ministry of Health. DHFI carried-out the activity of re-launch/upgradation of the Healthy India Website for the Ministry of Health. Appellant has argued that no service....