2018 (7) TMI 863

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 financial statements maintained by the appellants, it was seen that the appellant has rendered commercial training and coaching services to another coaching center viz. Chaithaniya Classes during the period 01.07.2003 to 31.03.2005 by way of imparting coaching to the latter's students and providing them with the study material. The total value of the service from 01.07.2003 to 31.03.2005 was Rs. 1,42,86,080/- which included value of study material of Rs. 1,40,72,600/-. A SCN was issued that these amounts received by the respondents were not included for the purpose of payment of Service Tax and a SCN dated 31.01.2006, demanding Service Tax of Rs. 12,02,886/- and education cess of Rs. 6000/- seeking to levy interest and penalty under ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....acity, is not supported by any documentary evidence; while the respondent states that the amounts on which SCN levied Service Tax were received by Prof. P.C. Thomas as an individual, the amounts were shown as professional fees received in the profit and loss account by Prof. P.C. Thomas Classes, no evidence has been produced to support the argument that the materials given to M/s. Chaithanya Classes have been exclusively prepared by Prof. P.C. Thomas himself in the absence of any documentary proof to this effect as the details are not forthcoming in the Service Tax returns invocation of proviso to Section 73 is justified. 4. The counsel for the appellant has submitted that the amounts received by Prof. P.C. Thomas was under two categorie....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....) that it is for the Department to show that the cost of materials is not separately shown and that the professional charges were not towards the classes conducted by the respondent in M/s/ Chaithanya Classes; the Order-in-Original wants the respondents to prove the otherwise; as noted above, the SCN itself mentions that an amount of Rs. 1,42,72,600/- was for the value of the study materials. By no such of an imagination, having accepted that fact; the same cannot be included in the value of the taxable service in terms of the Notification No. 12/2003- Service Tax; therefore, we find that the demand on this count is not sustainable. 8. Coming to the salary or remuneration received by the respondent, we find that neither the SCN nor the O....