TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal rules in favor of appellant on 'Tour Operator Service' definition challenge</h1> <h3>M/s. Air India Versus C.S.T. Delhi</h3> M/s. Air India Versus C.S.T. Delhi - 2017 (5) G. S. T. L. 172 (Tri. - Del.) Issues:Interpretation of the definition of 'Tour Operator Service' under Section 65(115) of the Finance Act, 1994 for the purpose of service tax liability.Analysis:The case involved the appellant, engaged in the business of transportation of passengers and goods by aircraft, offering promotional schemes including transportation to tourist destinations. The department considered these schemes as taxable 'Tour Operator Service'. The appellant challenged this classification, arguing that they do not engage in planning, scheduling, or organizing tours. The Tribunal analyzed the definition of 'Tour Operator' under Section 65(115) of the Finance Act, 1994, which includes persons engaged in planning, organizing, or arranging tours. The Circular provided by the appellant detailed package features, showing the all-inclusive nature of the packages. However, the Tribunal found that the appellant did not provide consultancy in planning tours for passengers, thus falling outside the scope of 'Tour Operator Service'.The appellant's argument was supported by a previous decision involving Jet Airways India Ltd., where it was held that airlines offering tour packages to passengers did not fall under 'Tour Operator Service'. The Tribunal emphasized that to be classified as a 'Tour Operator', the entity must be engaged in planning, scheduling, or organizing tours, which was not the case with the appellant. The judgment highlighted the importance of the specific activities mentioned in the definition of 'Tour Operator Service' and how they must be met for classification.The Tribunal distinguished a judgment of the Allahabad High Court, stating that it referred to the pre-amended definition of 'Tour Operator Service', which did not include air travel with ancillary features like accommodation. The Court did not specifically address the planning, scheduling, organizing, or arranging of tours. This distinction further supported the Tribunal's decision that the appellant's activities did not fall under the taxable category of 'Tour Operator Service'.In conclusion, the Tribunal found no merit in the department's classification of the appellant's activities as 'Tour Operator Service'. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant, emphasizing the importance of meeting the specific criteria outlined in the definition for such classification.
TaxTMI 