TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (11) TMI 1092
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) The appellants were paying service tax only on 50% of gross amount representing training fees; however, not discharging tax liability of remaining 50% amount representing sale value of the course material. It appeared that the value of course materials would form part of taxable value and hence appellant had not discharged tax liability of Rs.1,12,26,207/- for the period April 2005 to November 2008. (ii) It was noticed that appellant had not remitted service tax amount from April 2007 to November 2008 in respect of course fee, the liability in this respect, after adjusting cenvat credit was worked out to Rs. 19,28,126/-. On being pointed out, appellants remitted an amount of Rs. 10,37,881/- leaving a balance amount of Rs.8,90,245/-. (ii....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 76 ibid in respect of the demands made for SCNs dt. 16.04.2010 and 20.04.2011. Penalty was also imposed under Section 77 ibid. Hence these appeals. 5.1 When the matter came up for hearing, on behalf of the appellant, Ld. Advocate Shri N. Viswanathan submits that appellant is conceding the following demands with interest liability thereon: (i) Demands in respect of Franchise Service - Rs.81,920 (proposed in SCN dt. 09.04.2009) and Rs.56,298 (proposed in SCN dt. 16.04.2010) (ii) Short payment of Rs. 8,90,245/- in respect of service tax liability for April 2007 to November 2008 (demand proposed in SCN dt. 09.04.2009). 5.2 However, the Ld. Advocate submitted that appellant is contesting the following remaining demands : (i) In respect o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....7 (49) STR 277]. iii) The issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Tribunal in (a) Cerebral Learning Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE [2013 (32) STR 379] (b) Chate Coaching Classes Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE [2013 (29) STR 138] iv) Since the materials are connected to the courses and hence are not excludible from the taxable value under Notification No.12/2003-ST is also negative by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in CCE Vs. Balaji Tirupati Enterprise [2013 (32) STR 530], which was followed in Electrome Engineering Enterprises Vs. CCE [2016 (46) 676]. v) Further as admitted in the impugned order-in-original, the appellant's invoices showed separate value for fees and materials and the transactions were reflected in their books of ac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ellant deliberately adopted 50% of the course fee as charges for course material only to avoid service tax liability. 7. Heard both sides. 8. In respect of the amounts related to Franchise service and short payment referred to in para 5.1 supra, conceded by the appellant, the said demands as confirmed in the impugned order are not interfered with. So ordered. 9.1 However with regard to issue of inclusability of value of course material supplied to appellants, we find that it has been held in a number of Tribunal decisions that the value of such course material is not includible in the taxable value. 9.2 In the case of Cerebral Learning Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs CCE Indore 2013 (32) STR 379 (Tri.-Del.), the Tribunal inter alia, held as unde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-S.T., dated 20-6-2003 is ignored, as it must, the assessee/appellant is clearly entitles to the benefit of the exemption. ... ... ... 9. Shri Dixit would refer to a passage in decision of the Tribunal in Agarwal Colour Advance Photo System v. CCE, Bhopal reported in 2010 (19) S.T.R. 181. The passage occurs in para 6 of the judgment dealing with question No. 3 framed by the Tribunal, which is whether the term "sale" appearing in exemption Notification No. 12/2002-S.T., dated 20-6-2003 must be considered as in Section 2(h) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 65(121) of the Finance Act, 1994 or the term would also include deemed sale, as defined by Article 366(29A)(b) of the Constitution. While referring this issue for conside....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he basis of this clarification, the demand has been confirmed against the appellant. The said issue came up before this Tribunal in the case of Pinnacle (supra) and the same was considered in para 8 of the said decision and it was observed that "It is not in dispute that the activity of the company is to provide coaching. The Revenue has not disputed the fact that the study materials were purchased by the appellants from M/s. Bulls Eye. Therefore, there is nothing in the Notification No. 12/2003-S.T. which would help Revenue in their arguments. The Circular of C.B.E. & C. quoted by the learned DR states that such exemption will be applicable only if material sold is 'standard textbooks'. The question as to what is a 'standard textbook' can ....