2008 (10) TMI 165 - AT - Service Tax

Demand and penalty for the period April 2006 to March 2007 in respect of rent-a-cab operator service - renting of vehicles to other travels and renting of buses to corporate clients for tour purposes - Submission that a similar demand of service tax on renting of buses to corporate clients for tour purposes was dropped by the same Commissioner for an earlier period and that the Department did not file appeal against that decision further, on renting of vehicles to other travels , appellant relying on various Tribunal s decisions - prima facie case made out against the present demand stay granted

Summary

Issues:
1. Demand of service tax on renting of vehicles and buses.
2. Prima facie case against the demand of service tax.
3. Waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery.

Analysis:
1. The judgment involves a case where the Commissioner demanded service tax from the appellants for the period April 2006 to March 2007 for renting vehicles and buses. The demand was for over Rs. 22.6 lakhs, with a significant portion related to renting of buses to corporate clients for tour purposes. The rest of the demand pertained to renting vehicles to other travel agents. The appellants challenged the demand, citing a previous decision where a similar demand on renting buses was dropped by the Commissioner, and no appeal was filed by the Department against that decision. The Tribunal noted the distinction between the two activities and found a prima facie case against the demand of service tax amounting to Rs. 13 lakhs for renting buses to corporate clients. Additionally, the Tribunal considered case laws cited by the appellants to support their case on renting vehicles to other tour operators.

2. The Tribunal, after hearing both sides and examining the records, found a prima facie case in favor of the appellants regarding the demand of service tax on renting vehicles to other tour operators. The learned counsel presented arguments based on relevant case laws, which the Tribunal considered in reaching its decision. As a result, the Tribunal concluded that there was a prima facie case for the appellants in this regard.

3. In the final decision, the Tribunal ordered a waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery concerning the amounts of service tax and penalties demanded by the Commissioner. This decision was dictated and pronounced in open court, providing relief to the appellants by granting the waiver and stay of recovery in relation to the disputed amounts.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues involved, the arguments presented by both parties, and the Tribunal's decision regarding the demand of service tax, prima facie case, and the waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery.