Valuation of air transport service: passenger service fee remitted to airport authority excluded from taxable value, and penalty set aside.

Penalty under section 78 was unwarranted because the short payment arose from genuine valuation uncertainty during the relevant period, and the tax with interest had already been paid on the basic fare and related components; the penalty was therefore set aside. Passenger service fee collected by the airline on behalf of the airport authority and remitted to that authority was not part of the airline's taxable value, as such amounts do not form part of the gross amount charged for the service and Rule 5(1) of the valuation rules could not be sustained after being held ultra vires; the demand on that component was set aside.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether penalty under section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 was warranted in the facts of the case; (ii) whether passenger service fee collected by the airline was includible in the taxable value of the air transportation service.

Issue (i): whether penalty under section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 was warranted in the facts of the case.

Analysis: The liability on the disputed components was paid only after the departmental clarification issued through the Board circular, and the record showed uncertainty in the field during the relevant period. The tax on the basic fare and on the other two components had already been paid along with interest, and the delayed payment occurred in the backdrop of confusion regarding valuation.

Conclusion: Penalty under section 78 was not justified and was set aside.

Issue (ii): whether passenger service fee collected by the airline was includible in the taxable value of the air transportation service.

Analysis: The passenger service fee was collected on behalf of the airport authority and paid over to that authority. The Tribunal followed the view that such amounts are not part of the gross amount charged for the service rendered by the airline. The contrary view based on Rule 5(1) of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 could not be sustained because that rule had been declared ultra vires the charging provisions governing valuation.

Conclusion: Passenger service fee was not includible in the assessable value and the demand on that component was set aside.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded to the extent of deletion of penalty and exclusion of passenger service fee from the taxable value, while the remaining uncontested demand stood confirmed.

Ratio Decidendi: Amounts collected by an air carrier on behalf of a third-party authority and remitted to that authority are not part of the service provider's taxable value, and penalty is unwarranted where the short payment arose from genuine valuation uncertainty later clarified by the Board.

---