2018 (8) TMI 693

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Respondent: Rep by Sh. Amresh Jain, DR ORDER PER ANIL CHOUDHARY: The Appellant is in appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) vide which duty and penalties have been confirmed for the period 31.08.2007 to 31.03.2011 by classifying the service provided by them under the heading "Commercial Training or Coaching'. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, Shri Sandeep Kohli,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....6) and Section 65(27) of the Act. Accordingly, show cause notice dated 10.02.2012 invoking the extended period of limitation for the period April 2007 to March 2011 was issued. The Appellants contested the show cause notice. However, the proposed demand of Service Tax of Rs. 1,98,182/- was confirmed by appropriating the already deposited amount of Rs. 1,05,186/- along with interest under Section 7....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nce to seek employment and accordingly opined that imparting of English skill will be covered under the exemption Notification. She further pointed out that there was an amendment in the scheme of exemption vide Notification No. 3/2010-ST dated 27.02.2010 amending the earlier exemption Notification wherein „Vocational Training Institute‟ was defined to mean an Industrial Training Insti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 4. On the other hand, the learned DR for the Revenue, while opposing the appeal submitted that when the earlier exemption was modified w.e.f. 27.02.2010 defining „Vocational Training Institute‟, the Appellant was duty bound to take effective steps for payment of Service Tax. Accordingly, he justified the confirmation of demand as well as penalty for the period after 27.03.2010. 5....