2015 (7) TMI 1079

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....m on the service provided by Computer Reservation System (CRS)/Global Distribution System (GDS). 2. Revenue has also filed appeals against the same order-in-original for dropping the demand relating to the charges (collected by the appellant from the passengers) which relate to airport taxes and the pre-ponement/postponement of dates of journey. 3. Briefly stated the facts of the cases are as under: The appellant-assessee is inter-alia providing service of transport of passengers by air embarking in India on international journey in any class other than economy class which is a taxable service specified under Section 65 (105) (zzzo) of Finance Act 1994. It was alleged that the appellant assessee had not paid service tax on-(i) the paymen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of passengers by air and therefore service tax was clearly leviable thereon. The appellant assessee on the other hand argued that airport taxes were merely collected on behalf of the airports and were remitted to them (i.e., the airports) and that the preponement and postponement charges were nothing but penalties for changing the date of travel and the penalties are not includible in the assessable value. 7. We have considered the contentions of both sides. We find that in the case of British Airways (supra) it has been clearly held (as a majority view) that British Airways India (the appellant in that case) has to be treated as a separate person vis-a-vis its parent company based abroad and in view of the admitted position that the cont....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... charges, the very nature of such charges shows that they are collected in connection of rendering the service in relation to providing transport of passengers by air service inasmuch as these charges are recovered for changing the dates of travel. Thus, the appellant's contention that these are mere penalties and hence not includible in the assessable value is not tenable. It is well-settled that it is the nature of charge and not its nomenclature which has to be considered. Merely, because an airline calls such charges penalties does not alter the nature of such charges which are clearly in relation to providing transport of passengers by air service because of service of change of journey dates is clearly in relation to transport of ....