9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 240X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re that the appellant were providing buses to M/s Gujarat Ambuja Cement Ltd. company on contract basis for plying their employees from their factory to residence and vice-versa. The Revenue is of the view that during the impugned period i.e. April 2002 to February 2006 the activity undertaken by the appellant falls under the category of I tour operator service', therefore, a show cause notice dated 25th January 2007 was issued by invoking extended period of limitation to demand service tax from the appellant under the category of tour operator service. The matter was contested by the appellant but demand of service tax was confirmed. Aggrieved from the said order, the appellant is before us. 3. The learned Counsel for the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rism, conducted tours, charter or hire service, from whole of the Service Tax leviable thereon under Section 66 of the said Finance Act, which has been made applicable retrospectively w.e.f. 1-4-2000. As the said Notification and the Finance Act, 2011 were not contested by M/s. Capri before the adjudicating authority, therefore, matter needs examination at the end of the adjudicating authority in the light of the decisions of this Tribunal placed before us by the ld. Counsel for M/s. Capri and to decide whether M/s. Capri is liable to pay Service Tax under the category of 'tour operator' or not. Therefore, the matter needs examination at the end of the adjudicating authority. 29. Further, we find that M/s. Capri has relied on several ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng, scheduling, organizing or arranging the tour but merely supplying the bus at the request of Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd.. All the planning of tours have been made by M/s Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd. In that circumstances, w.e.f, 10/9/04, the appellant is, out the ambit of 'tour operator service'. Further, we find that for the period prior to 10/9/04 the demands have been confirmed by invoking extended period of limitation as the issue liability of service tax under tour operator service was in dispute in that circumstances the extended period of limitation is not invokable for the demands prior to 10/9/04. 9. In result, the demand against the appellant is not sustainable, consequently, the impugned order is set aside. The appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
