Page 121 - GSTL_18th June 2020_Vol 37_Part 3

2020 ] ACADEMY FOR PROFESSIONAL EXCELLENCE v. COMMR. OF CGST & EX. 335
vices to that of university cannot be classified under support services of busi-
ness when service provided by University is not a business activity itself - Par-
allel institutes imparting degree courses recognised by law excluded from ser-
vice category of “commercial training or coaching centre” - Education services
can neither be treated as a “business” nor as “commerce” and demand under
classification “support services of business and commerce” not sustainable. -
Once a particular service has been specifically excluded from a particular taxing entry,
the same cannot be classified under any other service category to raise demand of Service
Tax. [para 8]
Appeal allowed
CASES CITED
Commissioner v. Dr. Lal Path Lab Pvt. Ltd. — 2007 (8) S.T.R. 337 (P & H) — Relied on ... [Paras 4(iv), 8]
Commissioner v. Six Sigma Educom — 2018 (9) G.S.T.L. 199 (Tribunal) — Referred .......... [Paras 4(ii), 5]
Commissioner v. Tandem Integrated Services
— 2010 (20) S.T.R. 469 (Tribunal) — Relied on ............................................................................ [Para 8]
Dr. Lal Path Labs Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner
— 2006 (4) S.T.R. 527 (Tribunal) — Relied on .................................................................. [Paras 4(iv), 8]
Federal Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner — 2009 (15) S.T.R. 279 (Tribunal) — Referred ................... [Para 4(iv)]
Federal Bank Ltd. v. Commissioner — 2010 (18) S.T.R. 62 (Tribunal) — Referred ..................... [Para 4(iv)]
JMC Educational Trust v. Commissioner — 2011-TIOL-410-CESTAT — Referred ..................... [Para 4(ii)]
Malappuram District Parallel College Association v. Union of India
— 2006 (2) S.T.R. 321 (Ker.) — Referred ................................................................................... [Para 4(ii)]
St. Antony’s Educational and Charitable Society v. Union of India
— 2006 (1) S.T.R. 137 (Ker.) — Relied on ...................................................................................... [Para 8]
Trichy Institute of Management Studies (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner
— 2011-TIOL-1521-CESTAT — Referred ................................................................................. [Para 4(ii)]
REPRESENTED BY : Shri Rajeev Agarwal, CA, for the Appellant.
Shri D. Halder, Authorized Representative, for the
Respondent.
[Order per : P.K. Choudhary, Member (J)]. - The instant appeal has been
filed by assessee against Order-in-Appeal, dated 26-3-2018 passed by the Ld.
Commissioner (Appeals), CSGT & Central Excise, Kolkata, in the appeal filed
against Order-in-Original, dated 30-1-2017 whereby the Ld. Jt. Commissioner,
Kolkata, has confirmed demand of service tax of Rs. 92,23,936/- along with inter-
est and imposed penalty for the period 2008-09 to 2011-12.
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant is an Author-
ised Learning Centre (“ALC”) of the Sikkim Manipal University and is engaged
in imparting education to the students for degree courses conducted by Universi-
ty under the Distance Education Programme approved by the University Grants
Commission. Proceedings were initiated by SIV, Kolkata, and a Show Cause No-
tice, dated 21-10-2013 was issued to raise demand of service tax under the head
“Support Services of Business and Commerce” for the period April, 2008 to
March, 2012. The Ld. Jt. Commissioner after following the due process of law
confirmed the demand which has been upheld by the Ld. Commissioner (Ap-
peals) against which the assessee is in appeal before us.
3. Sri Rajeev Agarwal, C.A., appeared for the appellant and Sri D.
Haider, Ld. Departmental Representative, appeared for the Revenue.
4.(i) The Ld. CA for the appellant at the outset submitted that they are
GST LAW TIMES  18th June 2020  121