TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (6) TMI 542
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o registered with the authorities. On the basis of the intelligence that the assessee had not been paying service tax on tour operators, investigation was carried out. On verification of the documents and on the basis of the statements recorded, lower authorities came to the conclusion that the appellant had contravened the provisions of Sections 68, 69 & 70 of the Finance Act, 1994 and they have not discharged service tax liability to the tune of Rs 54,27,678/- on the value of taxable service i.e. tour operator services for the period October 2000 to March 2004, a show cause notice was issued. Show cause notice also alleged non-payment of service tax on rent a cab services and business auxiliary services. Appellant herein contested the sho....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rs which have been conducted by the appellant is mostly through railways to various parts of the country and they had paid the amount to the railways for conducting such tours. He would submit that the ledger accounts of the appellant would clearly indicate that they have made payment to the Indian Railways for organizing such tours. Hence these tours are not conducted by road and would fall outside the purview of tour operator services. (2) Safari Scheme It is his submission that second demand has arisen on the safari scheme which is arranged by the Tourist Department. It is his submission that the appellant conducts the travel from various pick-up points to the Bhannarghatta Forest Reserve and within the forest reserve they provide ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. v. CCE, Vadodara [2009 (237) E.L.T. 317 (Tri-Ahmd.)]. He would rely upon the following decisions for the same proposition. (1) Vulcan Industrial Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Ahmedabad-II [2006 (73) RLT 642 (CESTAT-Mum.) = 2006 (194) E.L.T. 331 (Tri-Mum.)] (2) BSNL v. CCE, Ahmedabad [2009 (14) S.T.R. 359 (Tri-Ahmd.)] 5. Learned DR on the other hand would submit that they have been conducting tour operator services under the contract carriage vehicles. He would submit that the tours organized by contract carriage vehicles would fall under the provisions of tour operator services as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nsel) from October 2000 to October 2005. We find that the definition of Tour Operators during the period up to 10-9-2004 reads as under : "65[105] [n] Taxable service means any service provided or to be provided to any person, by a tour operator in relation to a tour;] (113) "tour" means a journey from one place to another irrespective of the distance between such places; (114) "tourist vehicle" has the meaning assigned to it in clause (43) of section 2 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 (59 of 1988); [(115) "tour operator" means any person engaged in the business of operating tours in a tourist vehicle covered by a permit, granted under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 or the rules made t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on of tour operator services. In any case we find that the activities conducted by the appellant being State Govt. Undertaking, there existed a doubt as to whether the activities of tours conducted would fall under the scope of the levy of tour operators was being adjudged before the various forums and had been settled by the decision of the Hon'ble High Courts of Chennai and Karnataka. A doubt always existed in the minds of the assessee. In view of this, and the learned adjudicating authority's findings that "It is correct that there existed a doubt and ambiguity regarding the scope of levy on tour operator services. The assessee being a Government of Karnataka Undertaking, service tax liability could have been discharge easily, but for th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....idences which were filed by the assessee before us, for the first time. As the adjudicating authority was not provided with the evidences, which are produced before us for the first time, we remand the matter to the adjudicating authority for his reconsideration of the issue after taking into record the evidences of assessee as regards no tax liability and should come to a conclusion as to the correct service tax liability on the appellant from 10-9-2004 till the date of show cause notice. 10. As regards the imposition of penalties, we find that the provisions of Section 78 will not be applicable in this case for the entire period as the adjudicating authority himself has held that there could be misconception and that a doubt alway....