9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (5) TMI 29X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bunal we waive the requirement for pre-deposit of the amounts involved and take up the appeal itself for disposal. 2. Considered the submissions made by both sides and perused record. The issue involved in this case is regarding the demand of service tax on the appellant for plying bus between two points as tour operator. It is the contention of the appellant that their bus was carrying passengers/employees of the various factories at Subhanpura, Vadodara and they were not conducting any tour as envisaged under tour operator services. From the documents produced before us and before the lower authorities in respect of registration of the buses, we find that Regional Transport Officer has registered the buses of the appellant under Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... exit, etc. From the perusal of the said Rules, it is very clear that to get a vehicle registered as tourist vehicle the assessee has to first conform the vehicle to specifications given under Rule 128 of Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1988. 6. It can be seen and noticed from the impugned order that the respondent had, in fact, produced certificate issued by Vehicle Registering authority i.e. State Transport Authority that 4 vehicles which are in question were covered under Section 2(7) of the Motor Vehicle Act as a contract carriage but they were not covered under Section 2(43) of the Motor Vehicle Act as tourist vehicle. On such evidence being produced before the Commissioner (Appeals), learned Commissioner (Appeals) has held that these 4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fact support the respondent's case, as correctly contended by the learned Advocate. We may reproduce the observation of the High Court which is as under :- "Inasmuch as the petitioner is a contract carriage operator and not a stage carriage operator, the observation of the Division Bench in respect of "spare buses of stage carriages" is hot applicable. It is also relevant to refer once again the observation in Para 41 ".... In fact, the most of the petitioners, who are having the contract carriage, are having the permits, under Section 88(9) of the Motor Vehicles Act read with Section 82, which are nothing but tourist "tourist permits" issued for the purpose of promoting the tourism and obviously issued to the tourist. Whereas contemplated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... already held that the respondent's four vehicles did not answer to the description of 'tourist vehicles'. 9. The fact in the current case is that the 4 vehicles were never run as 'tourist vehicles', as envisaged under Section 2(43) of Motor Vehicles Act." It can be seen from the above reproduced portion of the order that issue before us as regards the tour operator service is squarely covered in favour of the appellant. Hence that portion of the impugned order confirming service tax on the appellant as being a tour operator is liable to be set aside and we do so. 3. As regards the demand of service tax on the appellant as rent-a-cab operator, the learned Advocate submits that the appellant is not contesting the same. That portion of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
