2011 (7) TMI 300

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ainst the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) which upheld the Order-in-Original passed by the original adjudicating authority. The appellants were engaged in providing taxable services as tour operator. They were also providing service solely for rent-a-cab operator scheme service and availing the abatement of 90% instead of 60%. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... On being scrutiny of the service tax return filed by the assessee for the period from April 07 to September 07, it has been observed that the assessee has himself shown month wise total amount received/paid against service provided in respect of Taxable Service Rent-a-Cab as Rs.1,25,560/- for the month of April 07, Rs.4,32,660/- for the month of May 07, Rs.43,170/- for the month of June 07 and Rs. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Notification No.1/2006-CE dated 01.03.06 the abatement is allowed only @ 60%. There is also no evidence to support the argument of the appellant that they have claimed abatement of 60% and not 90%. The stand taken by the appellant therefore is undoubtedly erroneous.   4. In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant is rejected. The stay application also gets disposed of accordingly. &nb .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X