2018 (9) TMI 1067

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nical) Shri J. Shankaraman, Advocate for the Appellant Shri R. Subramaniyan, AC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Per Bench, Brief facts are that the appellants were issued Show Cause Notice demanding service tax under the category of franchise services for the period 16.06.2005 to 31.03.2007. After due process of law, the original authority confirmed the demand of Rs. 5,77,336/- along ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....passengers who are desirous of using services of taxi. The Department alleges that since the brand name "Fast Track Call Service" was used by the vehicle owners/drivers, the appellant is liable to pay service tax under the category of franchise services. He argued that the definition of franchise service had undergone an amendment with effect from 16.06.2005. Prior to this date, a service would fa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oduced any iota of evidence to establish that the appellant is guilty of suppression of facts. 3. The learned AR, Shri R. Subramaniyan, supported the findings in the impugned order. He submitted that non-payment of service tax would not have come to light but for the interference of the Department. That appellants did not intimate the Department that they are rendering franchise services and ha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... No. 5 does not make any obligation on the part of the vehicle owner not to cater to other customers. Thus, the driver/owner can cater to the requirements of other customers also even though they have entered into an agreement with the appellant. With effect from 16.06.2005, the amended definition is as under: "Franchise" means an agreement by which - (i) The franchisee is granted representa....