2018 (2) TMI 237

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ctivity of the appellant was allegedly covered by the definition of taxable service, namely, Rent-a-Cab Operator Service as defined under Section 65(105)(o) of Finance Act, 1994. Accordingly, Revenue is of the view that they are liable for Service Tax for the period October, 2008 to December, 2009. A show-cause notice dated 1.4.2010 was issued which was culminated into adjudication order, whereby the demand of Rs. 4,38,612/- was confirmed. Penalties under Section 76, 77 & 78 were imposed. Being aggrieved by the Order-in-Original, the appellant filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who rejected the appeal of the appellant. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the appellant is before us. 2. Shri D.R. Gadekar, learned Counsel appea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng their buses on rent. Therefore, the service is clearly covered under Rent-a-Cab service. Accordingly, it is liable for Service Tax. He placed reliance on the judgment of this Tribunal in the case of S.K. Kareemun Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Cus & Service Tax, Hyderabad-III   2016 (42) STR 988 (Tri-Bang). This judgment has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M. Venkata Reddy Vs. Commissioner   2016 (44) STR J279 (SC). 4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the records. On the facts of the case available on record, it is observed that the appellant M/s MSRTC is not handing over the buses on long time running agreement whereas the ownership of bus....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t is responsible for maintenance of the vehicles and he is suppose to fill the fuel and make the vehicle available along with the driver and substitute the vehicle in the case of any break down of vehicle. I find that the said clauses clearly indicate that the appellant herein is in possession of vehicles and is only hiring out the vehicles to ONGC for a stipulated period or as per the agreement. Whether the hiring out of vehicle is for a day or a month does not mean anything, as the said vehicle is still in the possession of the appellant-assessee or his driver during the entire period. I find that the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Sri Sai Krishna Travels (wherein I was one of the Member) was considering an identical iss....