2017 (12) TMI 685 – MADRAS HIGH COURT – TMI – Writ of Prohibition – tour operator services and/or travel agent services – if the petitioners have rendered tour operator services and/or travel agent services to other than those, who are either Haj or Umra pilgrims, the second respondent has to examine as to how such transactions have to be assessed? – Services rendered to Indian Haj and Umra pilgrims, who go to Saudi Arabia – petitioners' case is that such services are fully exempt by relying upon the Notifications dated 30.10.2009 and 20.8.2014 – Held that: – This Court does not wish to express anything on the merits of the matter and it is made clear that a decision would be taken by the second respondent in accordance with law after perusal of the documents produced by the petitioners. It is reiterated that on production of the records, the second respondent shall examine as to what are the types of services rendered by the petitioners and in case the second respondent is of the opi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
e writ petitions is identical, all the writ petitions are taken up for joint disposal. 2. The petitioners seek for the issuance of a Writ of Prohibition to prohibit the second respondent from holding any enquiry or assessment or raising demand in furtherance of the proceedings of the second respondent dated 11.9.2017/12.9.2017 and the summons dated 13.11.2017. By proceedings dated 11.9.2017/12.9.2017, the second respondent sent notices to the respective petitioners calling upon them to produce their balance sheets and profit and loss account statements for the years 2012-13 to 2016-17 along with income tax returns, reconciliation of balance sheet for the said periods, details of taxable value received/invoices raised and service tax paid/to be paid/if any, for the periods from 01.4.2012 to 30.6.2017, details of input service credit, sample copies of invoices, service tax paid under reverse charge, brief write up about the petitioners' business activities, copies of respective servi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
009, the CBEC clarified that service tax is not chargeable on the services provided in respect the tour undertaken for carrying out Haj and Umra pilgrimage in Saudi Arabia by Indian pilgrims considering the same as 'export of service' provided they fulfill the other conditions of export as provided in the Export of Service Rules. By referring to the Notification dated 20.8.2014, it is further submitted that the Central Government directed that service tax payable under Section 66B of the Finance Act, 1994 on the services provided by the said specified organizations in respect of a religious pilgrimage facilitated by the Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, under the bilateral arrangement during 01.7.2012 to 19.8.2014, but for the said practice, shall not be required to be paid. 5. Therefore, it is also submitted that the second respondent has no jurisdiction to compel the petitioners to produce the documents called for, as the services rendered by them are fully e
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
vision of taxable service. It is also submitted that the Delhi High Court took note of the decision rendered by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal in the case of Cox & Kings India Limited Vs. Commissioner [reported in (2014) 35 STR 817 (Tri-Del.)] wherein it was held that service tax cannot be levied with regard to outbound tours arranged for Indians by the Indian tour operators, since it was a service provided outside the taxable territory of India and that the Finance Act did not have extra territorial operation. 7. The learned Senior Counsel has further submitted that in the instant case, the question of production of records does not arise and the petitioners can be called upon to produce the records only in respect of such of the services, which have been rendered by them not covered under the Exemption Notification for the Haj and Umra pilgrimage service. 8. On the contrary, the learned Senior Panel Counsel appearing for the Department would submit that th
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
t this stage would be premature, as the petitioners, who are all registered under the provisions of the Finance Act and are rendering tour operator services and/or travel agent services, are bound to produce the records before the second respondent for necessary perusal and consequential proceedings. 10. There are two aspects that require to be looked into by the second respondent, if such records are produced. Firstly, if the petitioners have rendered tour operator services and/or travel agent services to other than those, who are either Haj or Umra pilgrims, the second respondent has to examine as to how such transactions have to be assessed. The second aspect is with regard to the services rendered for Indian Haj and Umra pilgrims, who go to Saudi Arabia. To examine both these points, it is essential that records from the petitioners are called for and without examining the records, a decision cannot be arrived at. 11. With regard to the second aspect, namely with regard to the serv
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
usal of the documents produced by the petitioners. It is reiterated that on production of the records, the second respondent shall examine as to what are the types of services rendered by the petitioners and in case the second respondent is of the opinion that the services rendered by the petitioners to the Indian Haj and Umra pilgrims are liable for service tax, it is needless to state that the second respondent shall afford an opportunity of personal hearing by way of issuing a show cause notice, so that the petitioners will be able to canvass the contentions raised before this Court in these writ petitions. 13. Hence, this Court holds that the prayer sought for in these writ petitions is premature. Accordingly, the writ petitions are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected WMPs are also dismissed. 14. The petitioners are directed to cooperate with the proceedings before the second respondent and produce all the records with liberty to raise all the legal contentions put for
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =