TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 567
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Order-in-Revision No. 01/2011 dated 06.05.2011 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mangalore and Appeal No. ST/2323/2012 is filed against Order-in-Appeal No. 227/2012 dated 17.05.2012 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Mangalore. 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the appellants are rendering taxable services under the category of 'Management Consultancy Services' and also various academic courses. During audit verification, it was noticed that the appellant was engaged in accommodating Multinational Companies (MNCs) and other recruitment agencies to conduct campus selection of candidates, for which different amounts were collected per successful candidates once the placement of service was confirmed. Since this acti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appellant has no role in the selection or rejection of the students. As per the policy, the appellant charges participation free for recruiting companies and they are also invited to contribute a sum towards corpus fund which is utilized to promote and enhance education infrastructure and faculty development efforts. It is further stated that there is no 'consideration' charged by the appellant inasmuch as the recruiting companies made voluntary contribution in the nature of donation and no 'participating fee' was charged by the appellant and the entire contribution was credited to the corpus fund; hence, the question of levy of service tax on such consideration is not sustainable. On the ground of limitation, it is submitted that there hav....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cement charges are collected from the prospective employers, the demand is to be sustained. It is also submitted that the reliance placed on by the original authority in appeal No. 2374/2011 to drop the demand relying on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Great Lakes Institute of Management vs. CST 2008 (10) STR 202 (Tri.-Chennai) is no more a good law. 4. Heard both sides. The only issue to be decided is whether the recruiting facility to MNCs and other recruiting organisations by the appellant is liable to service tax under the category of 'Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency Service'. The period of dispute is from 13.05.2003 to 31.03.2004 and 01.04.2004 to 31.3.2005 in Appeal No.ST/2374/2011 and the period of dispute is fro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is that the appellant is a trust and having no profit motive and hence, they cannot be treated as a 'commercial concern' as is defined in the Section 65(68). In the first appeal ST/2374/2011 for the period 2003-2004 and 2004-2005, the claim of the appellant is that they are not a commercial concern. This aspect cannot be accepted in view of the fact that each student has been asked to pay Rs.25,000/- and US $ 1000 respectively, for the domestic recruitments and international assignments. In view of this, the appellant being a trust cannot in any way rule-out the profit motive for having received these payments and there is nothing on record to show that these are voluntary donations. Accordingly, the liability to pay service tax needs to b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to do with the service rendered by the appellant of recruitment by collecting the amounts from the respective students continues to be a commercial concern, hence, the demand in this appeal is sustained. The show-cause notice was issued on 12.03.2009 for the period from 13.05.2003 to 31.03.2004 and 1.4.2004 to 31.3.2005. It is seen from the records that the audit was conducted in July 2007 and audit report was submitted in August 2007; however, the show-cause notice was issued on 12.03.2009 nearly after one and half years. Since the appellant was already registered for 'Management Consultancy Services' and were regularly filed ST-3 returns, the question of mala fide intention cannot be alleged against the appellant. Also, no grounds have be....