Judgment:
2. The service tax demand is on the ground that the appellant is rendering "on-line information and data base access or retrieval service". While the total service tax demand is about Rs. 3 crores, there is a penalty of twice the amount. Out of this, the appellant has already deposited an amount of Rs. 1.11 crores.
3. The contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the demand is not sustainable on merits. It is being pointed out that the appellant is providing on-line education service and not data base access service. It is being pointed out that subjects taught range from computer language, programming and providing computer service like website creation.
4. It is also being pointed out that amount already deposited is sufficient to meet the tax demand on the entire amount collected by the appellant.
5. The learned SDR would point out that going by the appellant's objective, the service provided by them goes beyond pure education.
6. The perusal of the materials presented before us raises doubt about the viability of the finding that the appellant is providing on-line information and data base access service. That apart, the appellant has already deposited over Rs. 1 crore.
7. In view of what is stated above, requirement for any further deposit is waived and recovery stayed till the disposal of the appeal.
8. The instant demand severely affects the appellant's finances and educational service rendered. It is, therefore, necessary that the dispute is decided early. We, therefore, order that the appeal be heard on priority in the week starting from 21-8-2006.