2018 (3) TMI 418 – CESTAT CHENNAI – 2019 (20) G. S. T. L. 86 (Tri. – Chennai) – Classification of services – rent-a-cab services or otherwise – whether the activity of providing cab to other travel agents for rendering services to foreign tourist would fall under the definition of rent-a-cab service? – Held that: – The definition of rent-a-cab scheme operator as under section 65(91) is any person engaged in the business of renting of cabs.
–
The facts reveal that the appellant was collecting hire charges – The issue whether hiring of vehicles would fall under definition of rent-a-cab service has been decided in the case of Sachin Malhotra [2014 (10) TMI 816 – UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT], where it was held that unless there is control, which is passed to the hirer under the rent-a-cab scheme, there cannot be a taxable transaction under Section 65(105)(o), read with Section 65(91) of the Service Tax Act.
–
Appeal allowed – decided in favor of appellant. – Appeal Nos. ST/32 and 162/
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
t proposing to demand service tax under the category of Rent-a-Cab Service along with interest and also for imposing penalties. After due process of law, the original authority confirmed the demand of ₹ 92,46,651/- for the period April 2001 to March 2006 and ₹ 22,65,398/- for the period April 2006 to March 2007 along with interest and imposed penalties under various provisions of Finance Act, 1994. Hence the appellants are now before the Tribunal. 3. The ld. counsel Shri S. Venkatachalam appearing for the appellant submitted that the appellants have not rendered the services of renting of motor vehicles as defined under section 65(91) of the Finance Act. To attract the definition under the said section, a person should be ordinarily engaged in the business of rent-a-cab service. To fall under the said definition, the control of cab/vehicle should be handed over to the person who hired the cab. In the appellant s case, the vehicle was always under the appellant s control and
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. P.B. Bobde 2015 (40) STR 953 e. Sunil L. Parmar Vs. Commissioner of Service Tax 2010 (19) STR 584 4. The ld. counsel also argued that the period upto 2007 would be hit by limitation for the reason that an earlier Show Cause Notice No.104/2005 dated 17.10.2005 issued invoking extended period had been dropped by the department after adjudication. Therefore, the allegation of mis-statement or suppression of facts cannot sustain. 5. The ld. AR Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy reiterated the findings in the impugned order. He submitted that the very same issue was decided by the Hon ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Commissioner of Service Tax Vs. Vijay Travels 2014 (36) STR 513 (Guj.) wherein the issue has been held in favour of the department. That the decision rendered by the Hon ble High Court of Uttarkhand in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Sachin Malhotra (supra) has been rendered without taking note of the earlier decision of the Hon
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ges from other travel agents. The facts reveal that the appellant was collecting hire charges. The issue whether hiring of vehicles would fall under definition of rent-a-cab service has been decided in the case of Sachin Malhotra (supra) and R.S. Travels (supra). The said decision has been followed by this Bench in Om Sakthi Travels vide Final Order No. 42127/2017 dated 18.9.2017. Further, the said decision is a later decision than the decision of Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Vijay Travels (supra). Therefore following the decision in the case of Sachin Malhotra (supra) and R.S. Travels (supra) as well as our own decision in Om Sakthi Travels (supra), we hold that the demand cannot sustain. The impugned orders are set aside and the appeals are allowed with consequential relief, if any. ( Operative portion of the order was pronounced in open court ) – Case laws – Decisions – Judgements – Orders – Tax Management India – taxmanagementindia – taxmanagement – taxmanagementindi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =