TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
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 overturns service tax demand for Rent-a-Cab services, citing lack of evidence</h1> The Tribunal set aside the impugned order demanding service tax under 'Rent-a-Cab' services for the appellant. The Tribunal found that the demand was ... Non-payment of Service Tax - Rent-a-cab services - Failure on the part of appellant to provide necessary documents - period from 2002-03 to 2004-05 - SCN dated 22.10.2007 was issued for demanding service tax for the period from 2002-03 to 2004-05 - HELD THAT:- In this case, no investigation was conducted at the end of the appellant. Only on the basis of information furnished by the Public Vehicles Department, Kolkata and information collected from yellow pages, web sites etc. and scrutiny of income tax records of the appellants, the demands have been raised, which is not sustainable in law as held by this Tribunal in the case of M/S LUIT DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CGST & CENTRAL EXCISE, DIBRUGARH [2022 (3) TMI 50 - CESTAT KOLKATA]. Therefore, the demand against the appellant is not sustainable. Moreover, the appellant has produced the salary bills of the drivers and a Certificate from the Chartered Accountant to this effect certifying that the appellant is engaged in plying metered taxies not rent a cab and the appellant was operating the same through drivers himself. In that circumstances also, the demands are not sustainable. There are no merit in the impugned order and the same is set aside - appeal allowed. Appellant challenged an adjudication confirming demand of service tax under 'Rent-a-Cab' services for 2002-03 to 2004-05 (show-cause notice dated 22.10.2007). Revenue's case rested on third-party information from the Public Vehicles Department, yellow pages, websites and scrutiny of income-tax records. Appellant produced salary bills for drivers and a Chartered Accountant certificate stating the appellant was 'plying metered taxies not rent a cab' and that drivers were employees. Tribunal held that demands based solely on third-party records, without an investigation at the appellant's end, are 'not sustainable in law' (relying on Luit Developers (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of CGST & Excise, Dibrugarh, 2022). On the additional factual showing (salary records and CA certificate) that services were provided through employee-drivers rather than under Rent-a-Cab, the demands were also unsustainable. Impugned order set aside and appeal allowed with consequential relief.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
