2013 (11) TMI 295

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n 39/97-ST which covers only tour operator service - appellants are providing rent-a-cab service, there was no infirmity in the order for confirming the demand. Penalty – Held that:- The appellants are registered as a provider of tour operator and paying tax and also filing statutory returns –thus according to Section 80 of the Finance Act, it is not a case for imposition of any penalties – thu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tered with the Revenue as provider of tour operator service. The contention is that prior to 2000, as per the definition of rent-a-cab service, the provider should have 50 cabs. As the appellants are not having 50 cabs, therefore the appellants are not covered under the rent-a-cab service nor under the tour operator service as the appellants are not having any tourist bus. In spite of this, the ap .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... authority and submitted that as the appellants are not having a tourist bus, therefore the appellants are not covered under the scope of tour operator but the appellants were wrongly paying service tax under the category of tour operator by availing the benefit of the Notification, though the appellants are providing rent-a-cab service. 6. We find that the appellants are not having any tourist b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X