AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (7) TMI 1178
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....availability of seats, reservation, ticketing, communication, distribution and other travel related information are made available on real time basis. The only requirement being that the airline network (computer system) should response on real time base with confirmation request made by the travel agency, assessing the data relating to the airlines, available in the data processing centre of CRS companies. 2. To enable this, the travel agents, in turn are provided with a computer by the CRS companies having suitable software and on line connectivity with their own data processing centre which in turn, is connected with the computer systems of airlines. The data processing centre, of the CRS companies makes available to the travel agents of the respective airlines, for ascertaining seat availability, the fare structure etc. and thereafter, enables booking of a seat on a particular flight of an airline. 3. The airline computer network in turn accesses and retrieves the data relating to booking of a seat by any travel agent from the database of the CRS server, on real time basis, for updation for its own travel related data. 4. The payment for this service rendered by the CR....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Finance Act, 1994, and whether appellant is liable to pay service tax. (ii) Whether extended period of limitation have been rightly invoked particularly under the facts that the situation is wholly revenue neutral; (iii) Whether penalty and interest have been rightly demanded. 8. The appellant was of the view that the aforesaid services received by the Appellant did not fall within the ambit of service category of "Online Information and Database Access or Retrieval Service" ('OLIDAR Services') and accordingly, for the period prior to 01.07.2012, the appellant did not pay Service Tax on the consideration paid by the Appellant to the CRS Companies for the receipt of the said services. 9. However, the said position adopted by the appellant was disputed by the department and accordingly, the appellant was issued the following two show cause notices demanding payment of service tax on the amount paid to the CRS Companies for receipt of the aforesaid services, under the taxable service category of OLIDAR Services: Sl. No. SCN No. and data Period of dispute 1 DZU/INV/ST/E/025/07/Pt./1832 dt. 22.04.2009 (SCN dated 22.04.2009). 01.10.2003 to 30.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it has been categorically held that had the airline Companies/appellant paid service tax under reverse charge mechanism on the receipt of services from the CRS companies, then they would have been eligible to claim Cenvat credit of the said taxes paid, making the entire situation revenue neutral and hence, the demand raised for payment of said tax alongwith interest and penalty is fit to be set aside. Jet Airways CESTAT (Final) order: The relevant extract of the said judgment is reproduced below for ease of reference: "10.1 We find that the arguments putforth by learned Sr. Counsel on the Revenue neutrality may merit acceptance for more than one reason. 10.2 Firstly, it is undisputed that the service tax liability on the payments made by the appellant to CRS companies is on reverse charge mechanism as if the appellant is a service provider. The said service tax liability has arisen on the tickets issued by the CRS Companies to various customers of appellant. It is also undisputed that the appellant herein has discharged the service tax liability as an output service provider in respect of the services rendered by the appellant under the category of "transport o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ow for ease of reference. "51. I also find favour with the appellant's contention that the entire situation is Revenue neutral. Admittedly British Airways, India is discharging its service tax liability in respect of air transportation tickets sold by them. The present demand confirmed against them, was admissible to them as cenvat credit, which could have been further utilised for discharge of their service tax liabilities. I do not agree with the reasoning adopted by Ld. Judicial Member that in as much as the tax has not been paid by them, the credit would not be available. The said finding is contrary to the law laid down by various Courts, including the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Admittedly, the demands stand raised by invoking longer period of limitation and during the relevant period, there was no service tax being paid by M/s British Airways, India and as such the question of availability of credit of the same would become relevant only once the demands stand raised subsequently on a disputed issue. Had they been paying the service tax during the relevant period, they would have been availing the credit of the same and utilising the same for discharge of admitted servic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be blamed for the same. Further, the fact that the entire exercise was Revenue neutral is also one of the factors to be considered in support of appellant's plea of bona fide belief. If the appellant would have paid the said tax, they would have been entitled to the credit of the same and would have been in a position to use the same in discharge of their admitted service tax liabilities. In such a scenario, there are plethora of judgements by various Courts that no mala fide can be attributed to an assessee so as to invoke the longer period of limitation. Accordingly, I agree with the ld. Member (Technical) that the demand is barred by limitation and is required to be set aside along with setting aside of penalty. 14. In light of the aforesaid judgements, it is submitted that the issue in the present case with respect to revenue neutrality is also settled by the aforesaid judgments. Therefore, the entire demand in the present case alongwith interest and penalty is liable to be set aside on the basis of the ratio of the above mentioned judgements. 15. At this juncture, it is also submitted that the aforesaid judgements have merely reiterated the well settled principle of law....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t sustainable for the reason that the charge of,- a) Fraud; or b) Collusion; or c) Wilful mis-statement; or d) Suppression of facts; or e) Contravention of any of the provisions of this Chapter or the rules made thereunder with intent to evade payment of service tax, has not been established against the person chargeable with the service tax, to whom the notice was issued, the Central Excise Officer shall determine the service tax payable by such person for the period of thirty months, as if the notice was issued for the offences for which limitation of thirty months applies under sub-section (1). 19. The thirty months period need to be established clearly. Show cause notice in the present case was issued on 23.10.2013 demanding service tax for the period 01.04.08 to 31.03.2013. Hence, in this case, the thirty month period will be from 01.10.2010 to 31.03.2013, as the due date of filing return for the six month period starting from 01.10.2010 falls on 25.04.2011 and the show cause notice has been issued on 23.10.2013, which is within 30 months period from 25.04.2011. However, due to coming into play of Rule 9 of the Place of Provision of Service Rules, 2012 w.e.f.....