ST - Coaching - Notf. 9/2003 & 24/2004 on fair construction merely require that vocational coaching must impart skills for seeking jobs - It does not require establishment of fact whether all students of assessee have got jobs - Exemption available: CESTAT
By TIOL News Service
NEW DELHI, JUNE 12, 2013: THE appellant runs a film and media business and conducts the courses in B.A in journalism; post graduate diploma courses in Print, Television; on-line journalism and media management apart from short term courses such as anchoring and dramatic arts, direction and script writing; television production; TV and Radio anchoring and presentation etc.
During the period under consideration, the appellant claimed exemption from payment of Service Tax on the taxable activity of "commercial training and coaching centre" in terms of notification 9/2003-ST dt. 20.06.2003 & notification 24/2004-ST dt. 10.09.2004 under the category of ‘a vocational training institute' which is defined in the Explanation to the notification as a commercial training or coaching centre which provides vocational coaching or training that impart skills to enable the trainee to seek employment or undertake self-employment, directly after such training or coaching.
The lower adjudicating authority denied the exemption and confirmed a service tax liability of Rs.5,28,030/- and imposed interest and penalty. It is viewed by the adjudicating authority that the course offered by the appellant cannot be described as a vocational course as by definition, such institute should provide training or coaching that impart skills to enable the trainee to seek employment or undertake self employment, directly after such training or coaching; it is evident that on their own, the courses provided by the assessee per se do not enable employment or self-employment directly after such training or coaching.
Since the Commissioner(A) too sided with this decision, the appellant is before the CESTAT.
The Bench observed -
"4…This conclusion is recorded by the adjudicating authority bereft of any reopening process. There is no process of reasoning that precedes this conclusion. It is a settled principle that every decision, in particular a decision recorded by a quasi-judicial or an assessing authority should disclose reasons for the conclusion. As pointed out by the Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. M.L. Capoor - AIR 1974 SC 87, reasons are the links between the material on which certain conclusions are based and the actual conclusion. It is not evident from the adjudicating order how it became evident to the adjudicating authority that the courses offered by the appellant do not prepare students to take up employment or self employment directly after such training or coaching.
5. The appellant professes to impart coaching/training in several areas already enumerated which include imparting of skills in areas relevant to journalism, print or audio visual and documentary film making. The exemption Notification merely requires that to be eligible for such exemption the institution must be a commercial training or coaching centre (which the appellant admittedly is, even according to Revenue) which provides vocational coaching or training that imparts skills which would enable the trainee to seek employment or undertake self employment, directly after such training or coaching."
6. Ld. DR Shri Jain would lay emphasis on the word "directly" which precedes the phrase "after such training or coaching", to contend that absent evidence of self employment or employment by the trainee after the course of instruction received, the assessee would not be entitled to the benefits of the exemption Notification. This contention by Revenue does not commend acceptance by this Tribunal. The exemption Notification, on true and fair construction merely requires that vocational coaching or training imparted must imparts skills which enable the trainee to seek employment or undertake self-employment. It does not require establishment of the fact whether one or some or all of the students of the assessee institute have obtained employment or have pursued self employment after conclusion of the course of instruction."
Holding that the orders of the lower authority cannot be sustained, the same were quashed and the appeals were allowed.
In passing: Training is everything. The peach was once a bitter almond; cauliflower is nothing but a cabbage with a college education . - Mark Twain
(See 2013-TIOL-879-CESTAT-DEL)
