THE DELHI PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY Vs. CST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DELHI Public School Society (the assessee) is the common appellant in the appeals before us. It has established and manages several schools in Delhi and elsewhere in India and abroad under the title Delhi Public School (DPS). Appeal No. 248 of 2006 is preferred against the adjudication order dated 30 -03 -2006 passed pursuant to a show cause notice (SCN), dated 24 -01 -2006, covering the period 01.07.2003 to 30.09.2004; Appeal No. 335 of 2008 against the order dated 18.02.2008, passed pursuant to SCN's dated 23 -10 -2006 and 19 -10 -2003 covering the period 01.04.2005 to 31.03.2007; Appeal No. 415 of 2009 against the order dated 23.02.2009, passed pursuant to the SCN served on 4 -11 -2008 on the assessee covering the period 01.04.2007 to 31.03.2008; and Appeal No. 1356 of 2010 is against the order dated 30.06.2010, passed on the basis of the SCN dated 05 -10 -2009 (and a corrigendum dated 21.01.2010, demanding the demand of service tax due), covering the period 01.04.2008 to 31.03.2009. Service Tax liability of Rs. 59,38,111/ -; Rs. 1,19,27,736/ -; Rs. 54,89,959/ -; and Rs. 63,66,118/ - apart from interest and penalties as specified in the respective orders of adjudication were assessed for the periods 1 -7 -2003 to 31 -03 -2005; 1 -4 -2005 to 31 -3 -2007; 1 -4 -2007 to 31 -3 -2008; and 1 -4 -2008 to 31 -3 -2009, which are the subject matter of the respective appeals. Shri P. K. Sahu, the learned counsel for the appellant contends that the impugned orders are unsustainable since the adjudicating authority erred in concluding that the assessee had received amounts under transactions (covered by several agreements with distinct institutions), constituting the taxable service of Franchise. According to the appellant the impugned orders are invalid and unsustainable on a plurality of grounds, summarized hereunder:

(2.) BEFORE we proceed to advert to the competing contentions addressed before us on behalf of the assessee and by the learned DR, Shri Amaresh Jain on behalf of Revenue; appraise the vitality of reasons recorded by the adjudicating authority; consider the terms and conditions of the agreements leading to the transactions in issue; and analyze the precedents cited at the Bar, we consider it appropriate to set out relevant provisions of the Act and of the agreements, which have a bearing on determination of the appeals.

(3.) ANALYSES of O -I -O No. 11/RK/2006, dated 30.03.2006: