9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (2) TMI 490X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t vehicles, since the same do not comply with the specifications mentioned under Rule 128 - the certificate given by the Regional Transport Office, as produced above, who is the proper authority to give decision on the said dispute, is clear that the vehicle being used by the respondents cannot be held to be tourist vehicles - Appeal is rejected - ST/143 of 2006 - A/328-329/WZB/AHD/2011 - Dated: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsport Authority, Bhavanagar and are covered under the PCOP (Contract Carriage Permit) issued by the said authority. They were not paying the service tax on the ground that the tour is not being conducted in a tourist vehicle as defined in Section 2 (43) of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, inasmuch as their vehicle do not comply with the provisions of Rule 128 of Central Motor Vehicles Act, 1989, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner (Appeals) in his impugned order and is being reproduced below for ready reference:- "Hereby certificate that passenger bus no. is registered as a Contract Carriage under Clause 2(7) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 which is not covered as Tourist Vehicle defined under Clause 2 (43) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 read with Rule 82 to 85 and 128 framed under Central Motor Vehicle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... concluded that the certificate being provided by the respondents were not covered by the Tour Operator services. The said order of Commissioner (Appeals) is impugned before us. 6. On going through the grounds of appeal, we find that the gist of the same is that the vehicles being used by the respondents were covered by a permit given by the transport authorities and as such, they have to be trea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
