TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (5) TMI 71
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Shri C. Mallikarjun Reddy, Superintendent/AR for the Revenue. ORDER Per: P.V. Subba Rao. 1. These two applications for Rectification of Mistake are filed by the assessee and the revenue against final order A/30137/2019 dated 29.01.2019. Heard both sides and perused the records. 2. The revenue filed the ROM application on the following grounds: In the final order, this bench has extended....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s as notified under the Apprentices Act, 1961 (52 of 1961)." Thus, from 27.02.2010 the assessee M/s ISB were clearly not covered under the definition of vocational training and coaching centre. Therefore, they were not entitled to the benefit of this exemption notification. It was further submitted that in Para 13 of the Final Order, Sec.78 has been wrongly referred to for the demand for norma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unal and the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed their appeal as reported in 2018 (16) GSTL J79 (SC). Thus, the issue has reached finality and they are entitled to the benefit of the exemption during the intervening period as well. As far as the penalty is concerned, the assessee submits that in the impugned Final Order, this bench had followed the decision of Final Order No. 514-520/2012 dated 31.12.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be read as "Consequently, the demand for the period July, 2003 to 26.02.2010 needs to be set aside and we do so. As far as the period from 27.02.2010 ....." C. In Para 13, the words "The question of penalty does not apply in this case as it is a demand for normal period under Section 78" may be read as "the question of penalty does not apply in this case as it is a demand for normal period." ....