P.G. Chacko, Judicial Member - This application filed by the appellant seeks waiver and stay in respect of the dues adjudged against them, which include an amount of Rs. 3,11,31,213/- demanded as service tax and education cess for the period from December 2007 to July 2009. The impugned demand is under the Head "Management or Business Consultancy Services". On a perusal of the records, we find the following facts which are not in dispute :

(a) Demand of Rs. 1.95 crore towards service tax and education cess is on the gross amount collected by the appellant from the Sikkim-Manipal University (SMU) as consideration for the services rendered to the university.

(b) Demand of Rs. 82 lakh is on the gross amount collected by the appellant from the Manipal University/Manipal Academy of Higher Education as consideration for the services rendered to the academy which is a part of the university.

(c) Demand of approximately Rs. 20 lakh is on the gross amount collected by the appellant from the National Association of Software and Service Companies (NASSCOM) for the services rendered to them.

(d) All the aforesaid services were rendered under the respective agreements entered into by the appellant with the service recipient.

(e) Under the agreements with the Manipal University, and the SMU, appellant conducted regular examinations for the students of the two universities and online entrance examinations for the candidates who sought admission to the universities. The appellant arranged these examinations at select centres, deployed then own personnel for the conduct of these examinations, and conveyed the results of these examinations to the respective universities. The question papers for these examinations were set by the respective universities.

(f) Under the agreement with NASSCOM, the appellant conducted skill assessment tests for candidates who wanted to get accreditation certificates from NASSCOM in subjects related to information technology. These examinations were held with question papers set by the appellant on the pattern designed by NASSCOM.

2. We have examined the findings recorded by the learned Commissioner with reference to the definition of "Management and Business Consultant". It was found that the appellant was just assisting the conduct of the examinations of the universities and NASSCOM, thereby giving technical assistance to the universities and NASSCOM. It was also observed that the appellant, in their reply to the show-cause notice, admitted technical assistance having been given to the universities and NASSCOM. The learned Commissioner (A.R.) has reiterated these and other relevant findings recorded in the impugned order. Learned counsel for the appellant, who has spelt out the terms and conditions of the agreement, at the outset, has contested the finding recorded by the adjudicating authority to the effect that the appellant admitted having given technical assistance to the universities and NASSCOM. With reference to the definition of "Management and Business Consultant", the learned counsel submits that the activities undertaken by the appellant would not in any way be encompassed by this definition and therefore the appellant is not liable to pay the service tax demanded. It is submitted that, in any case, the services rendered to the universities are exempt from the levy. In this connection, the learned counsel has referred to the definition of certain services viz. "Rent-a-Cab service", "Tour Operator's Service etc.", wherein such services rendered to educational institutions were kept out of the levy. In this connection, the learned counsel has also invited our attention to the negative list notified under the Finance Act, 2012. The plea of limitation has also been raised. Finally, it is submitted that the appellant's financial condition is very bad as evidenced by the audited balance sheet for the year ending 31st March, 2011.

3. We have given careful consideration to the submissions. The substantive issue is