Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Dept. Can’t Classify Product as Zarda Scented Tobacco After Repeatedly Approving It As Chewing Tobacco: CESTAT *  Mere Uploading Of GST Order On Portal Is Not “Valid” Service: Tripura HC *  CGST Can Proceed Even If SGST Closed Similar Case Earlier: Delhi HC *  SC upholds 28% GST on online gaming with retrospective effect. *  West Bengal Govt cuts E-way Bill Threshold limit to Rs. 50,000 for intra-state goods movement. *  Criminal Prosecution Under Central Excise Act Can’t Continue After CESTAT Sets Aside Duty Demand on Merits: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Orders for Denial of Personal Hearing; Remands Matter Subject to 10% Deposit *  Ex Parte GST Order: Madras High Court Directs Immediate Removal of Bank/ITC Attachment Upon 25% Deposit *  J.K. Cement Receives GST Demand Order of Rs 8,02,113/- from Ahmedabad Tax Authority *  Delhi Police EOW Busts Alleged Rs. 128 Crore GST Fake Invoice Network. *  REPLY TO SCN CAN’T BE TREATED AS “EMPTY FORMALITY”: ORISSA HIGH COURT QUASHES GST DEMAND OF RS. 57.30 LAKH *  Challenge to CGST Provisions restricting ITC to Bonafide Purchasers : Allahabad HC issues notice *  CBIC Notifies Revised Customs Tariff Values for Edible Oils, Gold, Silver, Brass Scrap and Areca Nuts *  Delhi HC Orders Removal of GST Attachment After Statutory 1 Year Period Expired *  GSTAT Extends Relaxed Appeal Filing Guidelines till December 31, 2026 *  AO fails to Provide Import - Export Data from DGFT to Taxpayer for Reconciliation *  Gold, Silver Imports To Get Costlier As Govt Raises Customs Duty To 10%  *  GSTAT Enables Pre-Payment Access to Document Upload and Checklist for GST Appeal Filing *  GST Portal Restrictions Can’t Override Statute: Gujarat HC Allows Cross-State Transfer Of CGST ITC After Amalgamation *  Centre Revises HS Codes for Large Diameter Steel Pipes Used in Oil & Gas Pipelines *  Customs Duty Liability Arises On Warehouse Clearance Date: Supreme Court *  Government lifts export ban on de-oiled rice bran *  CESTAT Grants 12% Interest on Pre-Deposit for Investigation from Date of Deposit till Refund and Denies Interest on Interest. *  Government Overhauls GST Classification Framework for Non-Alcoholic Beverages; Fruit Juice Drinks, Milk-Based Beverages and Caffeinated Drinks to Attract Revised 5% and 40% GST Rates from May 1, 2026 *  India’s gross GST collections hit a record Rs 2.42 lakh crore in April, up 8.7% *  Customs clearance stalled, revenue hit over MRP dispute *  Shipping Corporation explores Middle East routes as Hormuz tensions disrupt cargo movement *  India, Kenya signs MoU for exchange of pre-arrival customs information *  No demand of Taxes under Reverse Charge if Tax Already Discharged by Service Provider under forward charge *  The India-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement, signed "once-in-a-generation" deal that eliminates tariffs on 100% of Indian exports to New Zealand
Subject News *  Consignment Sales Can’t Be Reclassified as Inter-State Sales Based on Pre-Agreement Evidence: CESTAT *  Exporter Can’t Be Denied Advance Authorization Benefit Due To ICEGATE Technical Glitch: Delhi High Court *  No GST Demand For Mere Wrong Set-Off Of IGST Credit Under CGST And SGST Heads: Kerala HC. *  Cenvat Credit Can’t Be Denied on Input Services Having Nexus With Manufacturing Activities: CESTAT *  Pending Proceedings Can’t Survive Without Saving Clause: Calcutta High Court Quashes GST Demand of Rs. 6.28 Crore After Omission of Rule 96(10) *  Madras HC Quashes GST Demands on TASMAC (Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation) Bar Licence Fee *  GST Proceedings Cannot Survive Omitted Rule Without Saving Clause: Calcutta HC *  Provisional Release Can’t Be Denied Solely On Dept. Suspicion Of Misclassification And Undervaluation Of Imported Goods: CESTAT *  Businesses Should Not Be Kept Outside GST Regime Without Due Process: Gauhati High Court *  Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Reconsideration of Contractors’ Claim for Additional GST Payment After Tax Rate Hike From 12% to 18% *  S. 108 Statements Can’t Be Sole Basis Without Following Section 138B Procedure: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Frames Key Questions on Mandatory Distribution of ITC U/s 20 CGST Act *  Filing of Annexure-B for Refund Applications involving Accumulated ITC using the offline utility in GST portal: GSTN *  No Service Tax on Parent Company’s Un-Invoiced Cost Allocations Without Actual Service or Consideration: CESTAT  *  Calcutta High Court Upholds GST Classification of Polypropylene Leno Bags as Plastic Products *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  GSTAT Issues Major Bench Allocation Framework; All Appeals to First Go Before Division Bench *  ITC Blocking Without Reasoned Order Violates Rule 86A; Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Release of Credit *  Allahabad HC Refuses Bail to CGST Superintendent In Rs. 70 Lakh Bribery Case *  S.130 Can’t Be Invoked Without Prior Tax Determination U/s 73/74: Allahabad High Court Quashes GST Confiscation Proceedings *  SC grants Bail to Rs 54cr GST case  *  Karnataka HC Sets Aside Duplicate GST Orders, Orders Fresh Hearing on GSTIN Cancellation *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  Transfer Of Unutilized ITC After Amalgamation - Supreme Court Issues Notice *  PUNJAB & HARYANA HC QUASHES GST CANCELLATION NOTICE FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE CBIC ENQUIRY REPORT *  LICENSE FEE, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CHARGES NOT INCLUDIBLE IN CUSTOMS VALUE UNLESS THEY ARE A CONDITION OF SALE: CESTAT *  DELHI HC ORDERS REMOVAL OF GST ATTACHMENT AFTER STATUTORY 1 YEAR PERIOD EXPIRED *  CUSTOMS BROKER CAN’T BE FAULTED JUST BECAUSE EXPORTER’S GST REGISTRATION WAS PREVIOUSLY CANCELLED: CESTAT   *  Supreme Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Delhi HC Ruling Holding Real Operator Behind Fake GST Firms Liable As ‘Taxable Person  *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected Merely Because DRC-07 Was Not Uploaded On Portal: Bombay High Court  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Laws/2011-12/1572

Organization short terms courses on topics rel to forest management - whether Management Consultancy Service?

Case: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF FOREST MANAGEMENT V/s COMMR. OF C. EX., BHOPAL
 
Citation: 2012 (25) S.T.R. 302 (Tri.-Del.)
 
Issue:- Asseessee organize short term courses in various subjects relating to Forest Management etc - Whether services provided by assessee are covered by the definition of “Management Consultancy Service” which attracts service tax under Section 65(65)?
 
Brief Facts: -The appellant-assessee is an autonomous Institute under the Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India and it is a premier Institute for education research, training and consultancy in the area of Forest Management. The appellant runs classes for various degree and diploma courses and besides this, also organize short term courses in various subjects relating to Forest Management, Social Forestry, Water shed management, Environmental Management System etc. for which no degree or diploma is given. These short term classes are organized mainly out of grants received by the appellant from the Government for this purpose, though some amount is charged from the participant. The department was of the view that the activity of organizing short term courses on various topics relating to forestry management, environment, etc. is covered by the definition of "management consultancy" and accordingly the same would attract service tax. According to the department, during the period from 1999-2002 to 2002-04, the appellant had provided taxable service of "management consultancy" for various organizations for which they have received an amount of Rs. 3,78,01,521/- on which the service tax chargeable would be Rs. 2379985/- which has not been paid. It is on this basis the show cause notice was issued to the appellant for Demand of service tax amounting to Rs. 2379985/- along with interest; and imposition of penalty on the appellant under Section 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.
 
The show cause notice was adjudicated by the Additional Commissioner vide order-in-original dated 3-1-2008 by which–
1) the demand of service tax amounting to Rs. 821137/- was confirmed along with interest under Section 73 read with Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994 and the service tax demand for the remaining amount of Rs. 1558844/- was dropped;
2) Penalty of Rs. 200/- per day under Section 76 ibid was imposed for failure to pay the service tax by due date from the date on which the tax was due till the date of payment of service tax; and
3)  Penalty of Rs. 1000/- under Section 77 and Rs. 8,21,137/- under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994.
On appeal to Commissioner (Appeals) against this order of the Additional Commissioner, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order-in-appeal dated 18-7-2008 upheld the Additional Commissioner's order and dismissed the appeal. The order-in-original dated 3-1-2008 of the Additional Commissioner was reviewed by the Commissioner under Section 84 of the Finance Act, 1994 and vide order in review dated 24-12-2009 the Commissioner –
1)  Confirmed the demand of Rs. 1767129/- as additional service tax liability under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 along with interest;
2)  Imposed penalty of Rs. 200/- per day under Section 76 in respect of failure to pay the tax by due date; and
3) Imposed penalty of Rs. 1767129/- under Section 78 ibid.
While Appeal No. ST/695/2008 has been filed by the appellant the order dated 18-7-2008 of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) the second appeal No. ST/106/2010 has been filed by the appellant the Commissioner's order-in-revision dated 24-12-2009.
 
Appellant’s Contention: - The appellant asserted that  the their activity of organizing short term courses on various subjects relating to Forestry Management, Environment, Water Resources Management, etc. is not covered by the definition of 'Management Consultancy Services', as given under Section 65(65) of the Finance Act, 1994, that the appellant does not conceptualize, devise, develop, modify, rectify or upgrade any working system of any organization, that the short term courses organized are meant for Senior Officers of Indian Forest Service, National A forestation and Ecodevelopment Board, Department of Science & Technology, Ministry of Tribal Affairs, etc, that these courses have nothing to do with the Management Consultancy Service, that the Commissioner has failed to observe that the they are neither engaged in management of any organization in any manner nor in rendering any consultancy, advice or technical assistance to any organization in connection with management of that organization, that since the their activity is not covered by the definition of "Management Consultancy Service", no service tax is chargeable and as such, the impugned orders are not correct.
 
Respondent’s Contention: - The respondent defended the impugned orders by reiterating the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) and emphasized that the appellant's activity is covered by the definition of Management Consultancy Services as given in Section 65(65) read with Section 65(105)(r) of the Finance Act, 1994. He, therefore, pleaded that there is no infirmity in the impugned orders.
 
Reasoning of Judgment: -The Hon’ble Tribunal held that the activity on which the service tax demand has been raised is organizing of short term courses for the persons of various organizations on various topics relating to Forestry Management, Environment Management System Social Forestry, Water Resources Management, etc. According to the Department, this activity of the appellant is covered by the definition of Management Consultancy Service which attracts service tax. Section 65(65) defines the taxable service in respect of a Management Consultant as any service provided or to be provided to a client by a Management Consultant in connection with the management of any organization in any manner. During the period of dispute, the term "Management Consultant" was defined in Section 65(65) of the Finance Act, 1994 as "The Management Consultant means any person who is engaged in providing any service, either directly or indirectly, in connection with the management of any organization in any manner and includes a person, who renders any advice, consultancy or technical assistance leading to conceptualizing, devising, developing, modifying, rectifying or upgrading of any working system of any organization."
 
Thus, for treating a person as Management Consultant, the following conditions must be satisfied:-
 
1) The person must be engaged in providing either directly or indirectly a service in connection with the management of any organization in any manner;
 
2) The service rendered by the person must relate to rendering any advice, consultancy or technical assistance relating to conceptualizing, devising, developing, modifying, rectifying or upgrading of any working system of some organization.
 
In this case, the focus of the appellant's activity in organizing short term courses on the subject relating to the Forestry, Water Resources Management, Environment, for the officers of Indian Forest Service and other organizations i.e. improving the skills and knowledge level of the persons of various organizations attending the courses and as such, there is no activity of the appellant, which can be called rendering advice, directly or indirectly, in connection with management of any organization. Just imparting training in certain areas to the Officers of certain organizations does not amount to rendering the service of Management Consultancy either directly or indirectly to that organization. Therefore, they hold that the activity of organizing of the short term courses, in this case, is not covered by the definition of 'Management Consultancy Service' and, hence, the impugned orders upholding the service tax demand and penalty are not sustainable.
 
Decision: - Appeal allowed.

Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com