Decided on June 09,2015

Allen Career Institute Appellant
Commr. Of C. Ex. And S.T., Jaipur -I Respondents


R.K.SINGH, J. - (1.)STAY application along with appeal has been filed against order -in -original dated 17 -10 -2013 in terms of which service tax demand of Rs. 1,41,02,854/ - along with interest and penalties was confirmed for the period 1 -4 -2007 to 31 -3 -2012 on the ground that the appellant has not paid service tax on the amount of scholarship/fee discounts/fee concessions given to certain students. The demand is confirmed on the ground taken that these were given in the form of scholarship and were not deductible from the assessable value. The appellant has contended that it has paid Service Tax on the entire gross amount received for providing commercial training or coaching service and what was called scholarship was nothing but fee concession or discount on fees given to students. It was not as if fee was collected at full rate and any amount in the name of scholarship was given to students. It also contended that there was no willful mis -statement or suppression of facts and therefore extended period for raising demand is not invocable.
(2.)The ld. DR, on the other hand, argued that scholarship is an amount given to the students and therefore the amount of scholarship given in whatever shape is not deductible from the full fee required to be charged from the students. We have considered the contentions of both sides. We prima facie find that the appellant has paid Service Tax on the entire amount received for providing commercial training or coaching service. The so -called scholarship was nothing but a fee discount granted to certain students. In other words, it collected discounted fee from certain students and so in relation to those students the gross amount charged for providing commercial training or coaching service was the discounted fee. Thus, what is called scholarship in the present case is not any amount that was paid to the students from whom fee at full rate was collected, it was just a fee discount. It is well settled that for legal analysis what is relevant is the actual nature of the transaction and not the name given to it (i.e. transaction). In the light of the foregoing we are of the view that the appellant has been able to make out a strong prima facie case in its favour. Therefore we grant full waiver of pre -deposit and stay recovery of the impugned liability during pendency of the appeal.

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.