Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2026 (3) TMI 26

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The nature of expenses incurred by the appellant and recovered from AASL include: i) Training Charges ii) Dry Provision uplifted from Catering Department iii) Amount paid towards repairing of different items iv) Adjustment for expenditure incurred on behalf of AASL 3. The appellant were filing their Service Tax Returns in time, in regard to their payments of Service Tax. 4. A Central Excise Revenue Audit (CERA) was conducted by the Office of the Principal Director of Audit, Central Excise, Kolkata for the period from 2008-09 to 2010-11. 5. Thereafter, a Show Cause Notice was issued to the appellant on 24.09.2013 by invoking the extended period of limitation, on the allegations that (i) the appellant is not entitled to avail the benefit of abatement in terms of Notification No. 01/2006-S.T. dated 01.03.2006 in respect of "Tour Operator Services" provided by it on the ground that the appellant had availed CENVAT Credit on common input services, which were also used in providing Tour Operator Services thereby violating the conditions for availing such abatement in terms of the above Notification (ii) the appellant has fa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai-I v. Soft Touch Aviation [2016 (4) TMI 986 - CESTAT, Mumbai=2016 (43) S.T.R. 120 (Tri. - Mum.)]. 7. On the other hand, the Ld. Authorized Representative of the Revenue has supported the impugned order. 8. Heard the parties. 9. We find that the demand of Rs.41,41,028/- has been confirmed against the appellant by denying the benefit of abatement as provided under Notification No. 01/2006-S.T. dated 01.03.2006 under the category of "Tour Operator Service" whereas the claim of the appellant before us is that they do not fall within the ambit of "tour operator service". For better appreciation of the facts, the definition of "Tour Operator" as per Section 65(115) of the Finance Act, 1994, is reproduced below: - (115) "tour operator" means any person engaged in the business of planning, scheduling, organising or arranging tours (which may include arrangements for accommodation, sightseeing or other similar services) by any mode of transport, and includes any person engaged in the business of operating tours in a tourist vehicle or a contract carriage by whatever name called, covered by ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l be waiting at the airport exit gate. * The packages between the cities mentioned in the annexure are valid, subject to the schedules between the concerned city pairs being operational, during the package period. * While booking a package, confirmation of seats on the entire itinerary must be ensured. * The payment for hotel stay in regard to children will be made directly to hotel. The applicable charge for children is mentioned in the Package Rate Inclusions Document. Airfare is payable extra. * Infants below the age of 2 years will be accommodated by the hotel on complimentary basis Airfare is payable extra. 6. On perusal of the package features mentioned in the above Circular, it transpires that the appellant is not providing any consultancy in the nature of planning, scheduling, organizing and arranging tours on behalf of a particular tour for the passengers. Thus, the activities provided by the appellant will fall outside the scope and ambit of Tour Operator Service. We find that this Tribunal in the case of Jet Airways India Ltd. (supra) has held that various tour packages provided by the airlines to the passengers (similar to th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e covered by a permit granted under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. (ii) the position from 10-9-2004 onwards: 'persons who are engaged in the business of planning, scheduling, organizing or arranging tours by any mode of transport and includes any person engaged in the business of operating tours in a tourist vehicle. 6.2 From the records we find that the assessees are only renting their vehicles. We also find that the department could not bring out on record that the assessees are engaged in the business of planning, scheduling, organizing or arranging tours. In these circumstances, the assessees cannot be termed as tour operators. Therefore, the demands of Service Tax against them are not sustainable in law. As the demands are not sustainable, the penalties also do not survive. In these circumstances, the assessees" appeals are allowed and the Revenue's appeals are dismissed." 6.3 The leamed departmental representative's reliance on the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Cox and Kings (supra), we find that the said judgment may not take the Revenue's case any further inasmuch as the issue involved in that case was an outbound tours i.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ellant, "Airport Service", under Section 65(105)(zzm) of the Act, up to 01.07.2010 means any service provided to any person, by an airport authority or any person authorised by such authority, in an airport or civil enclave. Admittedly, in this case, the appellant is not a person authorized by the airport authority. Therefore, the activity undertaken by the appellant does not fall under the category of Airport Service. 10.1. The above definition was amended w.e.f. 01.07.2010, whereas whole of the demand in question pertains to the period prior to that. 10.2. The same issue has also been dealt with by the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai-I v. Soft Touch Aviation [2016 (4) TMI 986 - CESTAT, Mumbai]. wherein it was held as under: - "6. The facts of the case, which are not under dispute, are that the respondent is providing various services to M/s. Jet Airways (I) Pvt. Ltd. under a contract between both of them. As regard the services, the Airport Authority of India has not role whatsoever in providing the services and receiving the same by M/s. Jet Airways (I) Pvt. Ltd. This shows that the services provided by the respondent were not authorize....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....10TRU, dated 26-2-2010, wherein the explanation of the airport services before amendment thereto and after amendment was given as under : The definitions of the taxable services, namely the "Airport Services section 65(105)(zzm), the '.Port Services' section 65(105)(zn) and the 'Other Port Services' section 65(105)(zz)] are being amended to provide that - (a) all services provided entirely within the airport/port premises would fall under these services, and (b) an authorization from the airport/port authority would not be a precondition for taxing these services. From the above explanation of D.O.F., it became clear that prior to definition of "Airport Services" in the Finance Bill, 2010, the services provided by any person in the airport by authorization of Airport Authority was covered under the definition of "Airport Services". However, subsequent to amendment the scope of airport services was enlarged and post amendment, service provided, whether it is by authorization or otherwise, covered under the definition of "Airport Services." This clarification makes it clear that prior to amendment, if a person provides the services in the Airport, ....