TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (4) TMI 1088
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... litigation. On the first round, when the matter reached the Tribunal, in an appeal filed by the appellant, against adverse order of the lower authorities, confirming service tax liability of Rs. 2,63,936/-, the Tribunal remanded the matter to the Original Authority to decide the case afresh after considering the decision of the Tribunal in R.S. Travels - 2008 (12) STR 27 (Tribunal-Delhi). The Tribunal directed the Original Authority to decide the case afresh following the principles of natural justice and also to examine the question of time bar as well as the ratio of the decision of the Tribunal in R.S. Travels (supra). 2. The Original Authority vide order dated 2.5.2011 examined the case afresh and held as below:- "13. Now, I take th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....artment, which clearly transpire it. As per bills, the appellant has charged from the client as per agreed tariff the amount for the number of kilometers run. In some cases lump sum amount for a journey to and fro has been charged. The vehicles were not rented out to them but the clients were transported from one place to another and the charges were claimed on the basis of distance traveled. The vehicles were not parted with and were not in the control of client. The Hon'ble Tribunal's judgement in the case of M/s.R.S. Tavels (para 5 thereof) is squarely applicable to the appellant as he provided vehicle with a driver to his client on demand for travelling from one place to another and charged him on per kilometer basis and also lump sum a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der the taxable net of 'Rent-a-Cab' services." 3. The Revenue preferred an appeal against the original order and the Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned order reversed the decision. He held that the appellant had provided cabs to industrial companies such as M/s. Shree Cements and to hotels, on regular basis as seen from the bills. It was noted that the cabs are placed at the disposal of their regular clients for use on long term basis, where, even effective control remains with them. It is in the nature of hiring out that determines the tax liability and not the method of charging rent, which can be per k.m. per day or per month. Hence, the Commissioner (Appeals) held that the adjudicating authority has not properly appreciated the f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ecision of the Tribunal in R.S. Travels (supra) is squarely applicable to the facts of the case and also relied on the Board's Circular dated 15.08.2006. We note that the appeal by the Revenue against the said de novo order is mainly on the ground that the Tribunal's order is not acceptable to the Revenue and an appeal has been filed in the Hon'ble Uttrakhand High Court against the said order. Further, we note that the appeal also mentions the CESTAT's order being not correct. We find that based on such grounds of appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) reversed the findings of the original authority. On perusal of the reasons recorded by the impugned order, we find that the distinction made by the Commissioner (Appeals) is without merit. In fac....