M\/s Smart Value Products & Services Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax, Noida
Service Tax
2018 (7) TMI 1758 – CESTAT ALLAHABAD – TMI
CESTAT ALLAHABAD – AT
Dated:- 26-7-2018
ST\/70817\/2018-CU[DB] – FINAL ORDER NO-71643\/2018
Service Tax
Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) and Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical)
\nShri Anurag Mishra & Ms Pragya Pandey, Advocates for Appellant
\nShri Rajeev Ranjan, Additional Commissioner (AR), for Respondent
\nORDER
\nPer: Ashok Jindal
\nThe appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein service tax has been demanded against them under the category of 'Commercial Training & Coaching Services' for the period 1st April, 2009 to 31st March, 2014 by issuance of show cause notice dated 21st October, 2014 along with interest and various penalties have also been imposed.
\n2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is a service provider and engaged in the selling of Healthcare, Lifestyle, Homecare, Perso<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n xtended period of limitation. The matter was adjudicated. The demand of service tax was confirmed along with interest and penalties were also imposed. Against the said order, the appellant is before us. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n no service tax is payable, as held by this Tribunal in the case of M\/s Chate Coaching Classes Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangabad reported at 2013 (29) S.T.R. 138 (Tri.-Mum.). = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" M\/s Smart Value Products & Services Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax, NoidaService Tax2018 (7) TMI 1758 – CESTAT ALLAHABAD – TMICESTAT ALLAHABAD – ATDated:- 26-7-2018ST\/70817\/2018-CU[DB] – FINAL ORDER NO-71643\/2018Service TaxMr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) and Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri Anurag Mishra & Ms Pragya Pandey, Advocates for Appellant … Continue reading “M\/s Smart Value Products & Services Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Goods & Service Tax, Noida”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-12880","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12880","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=12880"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12880\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=12880"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=12880"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=12880"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n3. The learned counsel of the appellant submits that the appellant is selling study materials for the coaching centers which are providing coaching services. The appellant is selling study material independently and have no nexus with the coaching institutes who are separately registered companies with Registrar of Companies, Income Tax Department, Education Department and with all other statutory bodies for providing coaching services the appellant is only selling study material for the students who are enrolled themselves for providing coaching with these coaching institutes namely M\/s APLL. The appellant have no nexus with these companies and appellant is selling study material and nor providing any service to the students or to these companies namely M\/s APLL. Therefore, service ta<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n4. On the other hand learned A.R. reiterated the finding of the impugned order.
\n5. Heard the parties and considered the submission in details.
\n6. On perusal of record, we find that facts of the case are not in dispute that the coaching centers are registered coaching center and provide services to their students. The coaching centers are also private limited companies and having separate identity known by the Registrar of Companies. We further take note on the fact that appellant is engaged in only selling of study material to the students of these coaching centers and paying VAT on sale of these study material. Therefore, in the light of decision of this Tribunal in the case of M\/s Chate Coaching Classes Pvt. Ltd. (Supra), the amount collected by the appellant by selling of study material <\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n