Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2010 (10) TMI 252

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the Finance Act, 1994 respectively stand challenged in the above appeals. The demand is on the ground that the assessees were rendering tour operators service by using contract carriages as tourist vehicles.   2. We have heard both sides. The stand of the appellant is that they possess a permit only under section 74 of the Motor Vehicles Act for contract carriage operators and do not possess a permit under section 88(9) of the Motor Vehicles Act for tourist vehicles. We note that in the case of Secretary, Federation of Bus Operators Association of Tamil Nadu v. Union of India 2001 (134) ELT 618/[2007] 6 STT 49, the Hon'ble Madras High Court has held that even if the petitioners before the Court possess permits issued only under se....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the owners of the spare buses thereunder. The same rationale would apply even to the contract carriage vehicles covered by the permit under section 74 of the Motor Vehicles Act. In fact, the most of the petitioners, who are having the contract carriage, are having the permits under section 88(9) of the Motor Vehicles Act read with section 82, which are nothing but "tourist permits", issued for the purpose of promoting the tourism and obviously issued to the tourist vehicles as contemplated under that section. Therefore, there will be no question of entertaining their objections and they will straightaway be covered under section 65(52) of the Finance Act. Such petitions, where the permits are under section 88(9) of the Motor Vehicles Act, w....