2013 (3) TMI 106 - AT - Service Tax

Tour operator services - buses given on rent - held that - definition of tour operator requires planning, scheduling organising or arranging tours. - there is no allegation that is it the appellant who had undertaken the planning, arranging of the tour etc. - They have simply provided the buses owned by them to M/s. Hans Travels who have further undertaken the tours - prima facie case in favor of assessee - stay granted. In respect of Rent a cab services stay granted partly.

Summary

Issues:
- Confirmation of demands of Service Tax against the applicants for tour operator and rent a cab services.
- Interpretation of the definitions of tour operator and rent a cab services under the Finance Act, 1994.
- Double taxation concerns and retrospective exemption for services provided.
- Requirement of pre-deposit for demands confirmed against rent a cab service.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to the confirmation of demands of Service Tax against the applicants for tour operator and rent a cab services. The Revenue alleged that the appellants provided tour operator services up to 2005-2006 and subsequently rent a cab services from 1-6-2007. The lower authorities held that since the buses owned by the applicants had tourist permits, they provided tour operator services. However, the definition of tour operator requires planning and arranging tours, which the appellants did not undertake. They merely provided buses to another entity for tours. The appellants argued that the buses were used as stage carriers and were exempted from service tax retrospectively. The Tribunal found merit in the appellants' contention regarding the tour operator category, noting the absence of tour planning by the appellants.

Regarding rent a cab services, the Tribunal agreed with the Revenue that the appellants fell under this category. The appellants were directed to deposit 50% of the demands confirmed against the rent a cab category within 8 weeks to stay the recovery of the balance amount and penalties during the appeal's pendency. This decision was based on the definition of rent a cab services not applying to buses but only to cabs and maxi-cabs. The Tribunal dispensed with the pre-deposit condition for demands confirmed against the tour operator category, recognizing the force in the appellants' argument against such demands.

The judgment addressed concerns of double taxation, highlighting that confirming demands against the appellants for the same activity as another entity (M/s. Hans Travels) would amount to double taxation. The Tribunal emphasized the need to differentiate between tour operator and rent a cab services based on the services provided and the definitions under the Finance Act, 1994. The matter was scheduled for compliance verification to ensure the deposit of the required amount within the specified timeline.