9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 512X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Jain and Ms. Priyal Jain, Advocates Ms. K. V. Kumar, DR for the respondent/Department ORDER Per B. Ravichandran The appellants are engaged in providing taxable services under the category of Mandap Keeper Services . They are duly registered with the Department and discharging service tax liability. 2. The dispute in the present appeal is with reference to liability of the appellant to pay service tax in respect of considerations received towards room rents for the rooms booked with reference to wedding ceremony. The Revenue entertained a view that the service recipient booked marriage garden attached to the hotel of the appellant for marriage. At the same time, they also booked rooms in the appellant s hotels for v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... He relied on the decided cases of the Tribunal in similar set of facts. 4. Ld.AR reiterated the findings of the lower authorities. 5. Heard both the sides and perused the appeal records. 6. It is seen that same set of facts were subject matter of decision by this Tribunal earlier. By the Final Order No.52293-52295/2017 dated 10.03.2017, the Tribunal held that letting out of the rooms in the hotel cannot be included in the Mandap Keeper Services for service tax liability. The relevant portion of the decision is reproduced below:- 5. We have heard both the sides and perused the appeal the records. We find that the department held the view that the charges collected for letting out rooms for accommodating guests has to be added ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he same. As such, we are of the view that the order of the lower authorities holding inclusion of the hotel rooms rent into the value of Mandap Keeper Service is not sustainable. The same is accordingly set aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief to the appellant . 6. Following the above ratio, we find that the impugned order is not sustainable. Accordingly, the same is set aside and the appeals of appellant-assessee are allowed. The appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. The cross objection is also disposed of. 7. Following the above ratio of the cited decision, I find that the impugned order is without merit. Accordingly, the same is set aside. The appeal is allowed. [Order dictated pronounced in open ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
